date

23 April 1805 Evidence Ends
23 April 1805

Evidence

Ends

Ch Conflict

'. Conflict

 Alterr[?] from the Marginal Contents

'. Ch. Conflict between /amongst/ the abovementioned ends

That between /amongst/ the the several objects above announced in the character of ends - of ends of justice, that is between the pursuits respectively directed to those objects, there naturally and unnecessarily exists a certain degree of natural continuity[?], is manifest at first sight. If to the positive, though limited, quantities expressed by the epithets unnecessary and preponderant annexed /attached/ to the names of the respective evils - vexation, expence &[?] delay evils we were to substitute the absence or negation of those several evils the pursuit of these collateral ends would thus be rendered altogether incompatible with the pursuit of the main or direct end - fulfilment of the predictions delivered by the substantive branch of the law. All procedure, how summary and expeditious soever supposes some delay - i.e. some time spent /employed and consumed/: all procedure supposes some vexation, all procedure supposes some expence, or at least some consumption of time and labour, an expenditure which is the equivalent of some expence. If, without regard to the main or direct end, and the mischief that would ensue from the neglect of it, the collateral end in those its several branches were to be exclusively pursued, there would be one, and but sure course for the attainment of it, viz /and that is/: to relinquish the pursuit of the main end altogether. Give up all recourse to justice, you rid yourself at once of all the inconveniences that result from the recourse to justice. The whole fabric of Society it is true is dissolved, and the humane race extinct, or thrown[?] back[?] into[?] the savage. The species is either destroyed or ruined: but at that price, the evils incident to litigation are done away.
Similar Items
  • Title: [23 April 1805 Evidence Ends]
    Description: 23 April 1805

    Evidence

    Ends

    Ch Conflict

    '.1 Conflict

     Alter from the marginal contents

    But though for the purpose of preventing /in every case/ the existence of delay vexation and expence incident to litigation in every case, the determination to take away in every case all recourse to justice /the judicial power/ would be thus absurd and ruinous, yet the opposite determination directly opposite viz: to carry on the recourse of justice - to bring about in every individual case and in every individual part, the fulfilment of the several articles of the substantive branch of the law without any regard to the quantum of collateral inconvenience, in the shape of delay, vexation and expence, would not be much less so. The mischief attached to the non-fulfilment of the arrangements taken and predictions delivered by the substantive branch of the law is variable upon a scale at both ends little short of infinite - is susceptible of an almost infinite number of degrees: the mischief liable to be produced by juridical delay vexation and expence is also variable upon a scale of prodigious /vast/ extent, though not quite so nearly approaching to infinity as in the former /preceding/ case. Under these circumstances it must every now and then happen[?] that in this or that individual case, the mischief resulting from the aggregate mass of collateral inconvenience, or even from a single one of its three /those its/ branches will be superior, and that beyond dispute to the good resulting from the pursuit of the main end - to the mischief resulting from /attached to/ the abandonment of it.
  • Title: [24 April 1805 Evidence Ends]
    Description: 24 April 1805

    Evidence

    Ends

    Ch. 4 Conflict

    On the occasion /subject/ of this double conflict, the following differences may be remarked /present a claim to notice/

    In regard to the conflict between the collateral end (which is always of a negative cast /complexion/) and the direct positive end as often as it really takes place, the opposition /two pursuits/ /opposite/ will be irreconcilable; of one or other object a sacrifice must be made. Without the production of some degree of delay, vexation and expence the main object, as already observed - the fulfilment of the article of substantive law in question whatever it, whether by infliction of punishment, administering of satisfaction or collation[?] of right, can never be accomplished or so much as aimed at: on the other hand, in some instances so it will be, that the collateral object, where it happens to be the preferable one - the avoiding to produce the necessary mass of delay vexation and expence where it happens to be preponderant can not be obtained, unless in the instance in question, the main object be utterly abandoned. /compleatly given up./ The object in demand /article demanded/ is of the value of a days labour: the testimony of Martyr is necessary to prove the plaintiffs title to it. If the abode of martyr be but a minute or two of a degree the vexation and expence produced by his attendance in the character of a witness may not be preponderant; and so far the two conflicting ends of judicature, the direct and the collateral, may in a certain degree be reconciled. Place Martyr at the antipodes, all reconciliation - all compromise - is impossible. l Either the claimant must lose his right altogether, or the witness must be loaded with such a mass of vexation and expence, that in comparison of it the burthen imposed upon the plaintiff by the loss of his right, is but as a feather[?] to a milstone[?]
  • Title: [24 April 1805 Evidence Ends]
    Description: 24 April 1805

    Evidence

    Ends

    Ch. Conflict

    To squeeze every part of the earth that was not England into a space /parish/ of two or three minutes of a degree square in England had cost these[?] scientific /artists/ no more than it does the Chinese to squeeze into one of the corners of a square map every part of the earth that is not China; but though the compression /condensation/ had so effectually been performed for the /certain/ purposes, it had never happened to be performed for this purpose.

    In the instance of the conflict /conflict/ between the direct ends and the ultimate collateral ends, the opposition is not thus irreconcilable /no such incompatibility takes place/. The /positive/ direct end may be provided for, and the negative direct end not neglected: the whole system of procedure has for its main object the reconciliation of these contending pursuits /objects/: the attainment of the one positive end without prejudice to the negative end. Were the positive end the only one, neither witnesses or parties would be heard but one side only: it is for the sake of /with a view to/ the negative end that they are heard so far as they are heard + also on the other side.

    + Infra