049-202.xml

Title: [3 July 1805 Evidence Introd]

Description: 3 July 1805

Evidence

Introd. Jurisprudential

Ch. Sources

3. ''. 3. 1. decisions

Not that in the process above described there would, if particular cases were selected for the purpose and taken one by one in every instance be any thing beyond the reach of human powers. So far from it on the contrary, under these limitations, there is nothing more in it that what dogs, not to speak of other animals, are found fully competent to. If you make /making/ a point, as Louise the 14th did, of feeding your dog with your own hand, and for that purpose of keeping it constantly on a particular shelf within your own reach, you do not choose that the dog should come at it, /the meat/ but when you choose to give it to him, what you will do of course /you take for this instruction will be/ vis - as often as he makes any attempt to reach the shelf and help himself, you will give him a good blow. This process being repeated a competent number of times, your dog will at the end of it have become pro tanta a juryist or common lawyer, having acquired a general idea of theft, and of the law by which in virtue of the attendant punishment, the act of taking or attempting to take him in /when accompanied with/ these circumstances been converted into an offence, which this in the form of jurisprudential law has been inacted by you against theft. And from the same way the corpus juri canind may be, as in truth /made, as in fact/ it every day is made by legislators in no small numbers made to receive not inconsiderable extent. Not that, after all this instruction and consequent generalisation the dog would be less at a loss /puzzled/ to give so timorous a definition of theft in words /in general on [...?], general words/ than Lord Hale acknowledged himself to be, which he was hanging men for theft: but to general words are disquisition has not yet got to that length but general ideas are all that in question as yet general words, another object to which [...?] for our [...?].

JB_094_248.xml

Title: [24 March 1808 Letter V Ends]

Description: 24 March 1808

Letter V

Ends of Justice

- a non-utility, which notwithstanding such its character, or rather in virtue of such its character, is a /vice/ compound of vices, of vices beyond /such/ any which it would be in the power of any really existing object, how vitious /depraved/ soever be [...?] /[...?]//[...?]/.

1. Uncertainty, its primary and effectual attribute, expressed within the [...?] result of all[?] form[?]

2. Spuriousness, it being the wish of the Judge disowning[?] his own work at the very time his hands are /employed/ seen to be employed in making it.

3. Imposture: produced in it as upon the people, and the Legislator himself, as the work of a legislator, never assigned, because never assignable.

4. Inexpediency, the necessary result of its spuriousness: the hands by which it is forged not being provided with the stock of information necessary to the making of good laws, nor any means of getting it. inexpediency, including an all-pervading repugnancy to natural justice.

5. Scantiness: the progress /space/ thus capable of being made /covered/ in the field of law being in respect of direction and velocity determined and limited by the calls made by individuals in the character of plaintiffs.

6. Incorrigibility, viz. at any rate by its own hands: for since no new speci of expediency can ever be infused /poured//drain[?]/ into it but by force of a greater mischief in the shape of uncertainty

7. Barbarity /8 Inhumanity:/ com,posed s it is of a string of spurious laws none /no one/ of which can ever be established without bringing with it that injustice which when /if ever/ inflicted by the legislator forms the disgrace of /a black spot on/ the statute book, under the name of an ex post facto law: instead of a word a blow

Take a man, as you would a dog, and give him a blow: coupled with the occasion on which it was given, this blow recollected by him to whim it was given, and observed by others (men or dogs) becomes a law, constitutes an article of jurisprudential law.

The offence undefined, though by proper authority it might so easily be defined, the law against theft a crime more frequently exemplified than all others put together stands to no[?] [...?] upon no clearer grounds.

JB_172_342.xml

Title: [1821 July 20 Rid Relinquishment]

Description: 1821 July 20

Rid

Relinquishment honorable

Slave Trade

Speaking of the French nation, I say the honest

part: for it is but too true and sufficiently notorious that in that nation

there are those who having made a vow to make slaves of their own countrymen regard

with horror any proposition /measure/ the effect of which would be to set limits to

the number of their slaves With you these men I am satisfied are no more in honour

than with me. But on this [...?] subject whatsoever may be said against them on the

score of barbarity /inhumanity/ and injustice, nothing can be said against them on

the score of inconsistency and /or/ hypocrisy. They have not sworn as your

Representatives by Articles 4 and 13 and your King has sworn to take for the end of

their government the happiness of all the individuals belonging to the nation: they

have not sworn to preserve civil liberty to all those individuals. In their eyes the

proper end of government is - not the happiness of all, but the happiness of one,

together with that of such few others, to whom in consideration of a certain mass of

property which no matter by what means they have secured /contrived/ to get into

their possession, it shall please him to let in for a share /loan/ suffer to enjoy at

his expence /share with him/ a share in the means of happiness.

And these same men - what /in their eyes/ are you yourselves in their eyes? A gang

/land/ /nation/ of rebels and traitors and rebels whose blood flowing from a scaffold

would to that of the vast majority of their fellow citizens be the most delightful of

all spectacles to their eyes. Such are the men with whom so long as any part of

Ultramaria is called yours you hold community of principle and affection and

endeavour: but with this difference that what with exceptions too inconsiderable to

be worth taking into account /mention/ they do but wish to be, you are.