date

13 Feb 1804 Evidence Securities
13 Feb 1804

Evidence

Securities

Ch. Summary

Engl. Law

If justice be worth the time bestowed upon it in this way in a court called the King's Bench /a Court of Common Law/ there is no reason why it should be worth less in another court, called a Court of Chancery /the /a/ Court of Equity/. At any rate it is not the fear /horror/ of delay that prevents men in the Court of Chancery from bestowing the time required by justice necessary to be employed by the Judge who thinks /would[?]/ it worth his while to do justice.

Other systems can shew greater imperfections /absurdities/, but none can shew equal inconsistencies. No other nation can produce two Courts of equal dignity, sitting within ten feet of each other, and deciding continually upon mutually repugnant /disparate or opposite/ principles. In no other nation is a Court to be seen which employs itself in stopping suits that did not begin it, and in beginning suits that can not be ended in it.

Not other nation has the misfortune of seeing the law the rule of action, split into two joining /everlasting/ divisions /fragments/ /fractions/ - one which is supposed to be of an ordinary kind, and replaces the name of law; the other which is supposed to be of a superior sort /a better sort/, and is called Equity

See which is at liberty to try causes in a proper way, and accordingly does os in some instances: another which is not in the habit of trying causes, and therefore never does try any in a proper way, but when it happens to think fit they should be tried in a proper way sends them to be tried elsewhere.

Suppose the interest /a regard for justice/ of the suitors to have been the object /final cause/ of all these inconsistencies /Agents[?]/ to a regard for justice every thing is inexplicable: ascribe them to a regard for an interest opposite /an opposite interest/ to that of justice /the suitor/, every thing is plain and easy.
Similar Items
  • Title: [26 Oct r 1807 Eldon's Bill]
    Description: 26 Oct r 1807

    Eldon's Bill

    '.11

    Procedure the same

    Thus inconsiderable being the benefit which it is in the power of the principle of competition to render to the interests of justice on one hand /side/, on the supposition that the two supposed competing Courts are at liberty each of them to frame for itself its own rules, it remains to form an estimate of the benefit of uniformity, that benefit of which to obtain the benefit of competition it would be necessary to make /give up/ a sacrifice.

    For forming any conception of the value of the benefit of uniformity, there is no other mode /resource //method/ than to look for a case in which the opposite disadvantage has been exemplified. In Scotland the unity of the supreme Court being an effectual bar to every such exemplification, England is the country, Westminster Hall the place from which alone any apposite instruction of this kind can be derived unless the eye were to travel as far as France .

    In Westminster Hall, and all-providing though fantastic[?], besides the radical distinction between /Equity and/ Common Law and Equity by which the Court of Chancery is divided /separated/ from the King's Bench and Common Pleas and the Court of Exchequer from itself, the Court of Chancery as compared with the Equity side of the Exchequer, and the Courts of King's Bench and Common Pleas as compared with one another, and with the Common Law side of the Exchequer afford examples /so many exemplifications/ of the existence of diversiformity and of the prejudice /injury/ resulting from it to the interests of justice. The greater /more extensive/ this diversity, the more extensive the empire /demesne/ /field / of [...?] sincere: and the more extensive that demesne /field/, the more grievous the uncognosibility and uncertainty of the law, with the whole mass of fraud /all the frauds/ and oppression that grow out of it.
  • Title: [1822 Oct¼r. 3¼d. Tripoli. Account]
    Description: 1822 Oct¼r. 3¼d.

    Tripoli. Account of

    ?.5. Religious Establishment.

    Notaries

    Attached to every Mosque are moreover two Notaries. Such, in the language of Rome©bred law, is the appellation in the compass of a single word, by which a general conception of their functions may be best conveyed. In the language of English law they may be termed Conveyancers: it being understood that in those same functions as in those of the French ”Notaire•, is included the conveyancing that part of the business of an /the/ English sort of professional lawyer, who used to be called an Attorney, but who, /that name having been so much worn by obloquy, has tried to make its escape out of it, and/ within these few years, having worn out that name, is affronted if spoken of or to out of Court or Office by any other name than Solicitor.

    Of these official persons, the function consists in drawing up the several written instruments, private as well as public, to which such a degree of importance is attached as causes them to be committed to writing.

    In particular, conveyances and contracts having for their subject matter property or condition in life.

    Another service in which their skill is occasionally employed, is that of drawing up what, in the language of the French Edition of Rome©bred law, is stiled a ”praces©verbal•. For preventing the deperition of a lot of evidence that may eventually become necessary on the occasion of a suit not yet in existence, or not yet ripe for the receipt of Evidence, provision for instance is made by the Ministry of these functionaries. Witnesses are in this way examined ”in perpetuam nei memoriam•: and, how incredible soever it may appear to Lord Eldon, without the benefit /assistance/ of a suit in Chancery, or that side of the Court of Exchequer which calls its proceedings Equity.
  • Title: [4 Feb y 1808 on L Eldons Bill]
    Description: 4 Feb y 1808

    on L Eldons Bill

    [...?] Appeals

    1. Execution not possible

    Of the above propositions, that which admitts the increase of paper money to be conducive to the increase of real wealth might it may perhaps be thought as well as hev been omitted: inas much as it operates as far as it goes against the practical conclusion respecting the stoppage of the increase; and thereby leads rather to perplex /produce confusion in the argument/ and thwart the above conclusion instead of supporting it.

    But besides that truth on [...?] [...?] side it may be found to be is as it ought to be the object of my research, this /the/ admission[?] is if real service to the conclusion, by showing anticipating an argument which had it been left to present itself on the other side would naturally have appeared /have been apt to appear/ conclusive.

    There remained, it is true another superior Equity Court, to which though co-ordinate with the Court of Chancery /sitting in the same [...?]/, the influence[?] of the cause which we have seen withdrawing that High Court from out of the power of the execution - suspending rule did not extend. But, compared with that of the Court of Chancery, the quantity of business done on the Equity side of the Exchequer has never been otherwise than very inconsiderable. After the Common Law practice of the Common Law Courts the Equity practice pf the Court of Chancery is /was/ comparatively speaking but one innovation: the Equity practice of the Court of Exchequer was an innovation still more recent. The Chancellor was from the very first a Giant: in comparison of that Giant the Barons of the Exchequer were but pigmies. The Giant of course, take the lead: the Pygmies, where they mustered up courage to ape him, trod of course in his steps.