date

[059- 131] 16 Apr. 1803 Evidence
[059- 131]

16 Apr. 1803

Evidence

Omitt in Evidence? Note to p. 10

10 Note

Ends

As for the inconvenience the mischievousness of failure of justice of non-decision or wrong decision to the prejudice of the cause of the plaintiff whether penal ground or non-penal - the mischief resulting from the disfulfillment of the positive predictions of the law on either ground - it is a proposition /point/ on this occasion a proposition to be assumed - not proved. Either it is a mischief or there ought to be no such law /no such law ought to be continued in existence. Every coercive every efficient law is in the very essence of it an evil: if in any case that evil be not compensated for by a more than equivalent good, it /the law/ ought to be abolished. In the fulfilment of those predictions of the non-penal branch of the law by which proprietary and other reghts are promised in the cases specified to be conferred - of those predictions of the penal branch by which satisfaction in the case of injury is promised to be administered depends security - the sense of security - in a word the existence of security. If in any instance the law is deemed by the competent authority ill-adapted to its purpose, repugnant or unconducive to its end the remedy for the grievance /proper mode if relief against the burthen of it/ consists in the abolition of the law not in conniving at the evasion of it, and striking, or suffering it to be stricken with impotence. Be the law good or bad on no supposition whatever can the disfulfilment of the predictions delivered by it be otherwise than an evil /be placed otherwise than to the account of evil/. Good the law cannot be unless the nature of it be to pay by its superflux of goodness /utility/ for all the evil which is inseparably attached to it: attached to the execution of it upon the disobedient as well as to the observance of it by the obedient /burthen of the obligation upon by it upon [sic]/.If it be bad /the law be a bad law/, the non-execution of it will still be an evil: relatively or comparatively an evil if not absolutely an evil. It will be an evil in comparison of the abolition of the law: an operation by which will be produced more than all the good that could be produced by connivances at the violation, without any of the mischief.
Similar Items
  • Title: [6 Dec r 1803 Evidence Exclusion]
    Description: 6 Dec r 1803

    Evidence

    Exclusion

    2 Notoriety

    Exception 3. Two laws: 1. A law say in the first place a penal law, and belonging /in that [...?]/ as above supposed to the substantive branch of the law /body of the laws/. 2. a law belonging to the adjective branch of the law: no other words, a law or rule of procedure: and this a bad one; the effect of it being, as often as it is applied, the destroying the effect of the abovementioned good law; the giving impunity and thence encouragement to the mischievous acts prohibited by it. by that means, the withholding /withdrawing/ the protection promised by it: the disfulfilling the predictions uttered by it. the violating the engagements taken by it. Here again there are two descriptions of persons to whom it is desirable that this bad /adjective/ law destructive pro tanto of the effect of the good substantive law should be unknown. 1. viz: persons whose situation exposes them to the temptation of becoming transgressors of the good substantive law: 2. so long /far/ and so long /far/ only, as the good substantive law remains untransgressed, then by whom so long as it escapes being transgressed to their prejudice the production afforded by it is enjoyed. If in the instance of any individual the substantive law comes to be transgressed, and the /[...?]/ mischief against which it was designed to afford him protection brought down upon the head, from thence-forward the state of the case in respect of the utility of information is reversed. The result was to be wished for on his account is - not that he should remain in ignorance of the bad adjective law by which the good substantive law was rendered of no use to him, but that he should be approved of it, that the mischief that has already befallen him may not be approved by the mischief of a useless appeal to justice.

    Exception 4. Two laws, as before: a substantive /good/ law, but at present of the non-penal class; and a bad adjective law, as before; bad by defalcating from the efficacy of the good substantive law Two classes of persons, as before,e to whom it is desirable that the bad adjective law should remain unknown: 1. the persons in whose situation exposes them to the temptation of evading to submitt to the obligations correspondent and inseparably attached to the rights conferred by the good substantive law: 2. so far and so far only as the good substantive law remains unclouded, as above, then in whom the rights created by it are meant to be conferred. The description of them, mutatis mutandis, as above: varying only according to the variation in the nature of the substantive law.
  • Title: [6 Dec r 1803 Evidence Exclusion]
    Description: 6 Dec r 1803

    Evidence

    Exclusion

    2 Notoriety

    '.1

    The exceptions, for such there are, are not so obvious but that the stating of them may be of considerable use, and through important lights on the whole body of the law.

    Exception 1.

    Case 1. The law a bad one: and say first a penal one /a penal law/. There are two descriptions of persons in whose instance /to whom/ it is desirable that it should be unknown. 1. All persons /Every person/ who might be disposed to call it into effect by prosecuting upon it /prosecutions grounded on it/. 2. All persons on whom it bears - all persons on whom it imposes coercion, all persons who exercise or wish to exercise the liberty which it seeks to take away: viz. in the instance of persons of this description so long and so long only as it remains unnoticed or what comes to the same thing, unemployed /uncalled forth into action/ by persons of the former class; viz: so long as provocation is not the consequence, real or apprehended, of the exercise of such liberty.

    Exception 3

    Case 2 d This law a bad one: a non-penal law. call it a distributive law. + and say now a law of the non-penal class: a law by which at the expense of a person of one description a right is enacted and conferred upon another. Descriptions of persons to whom it is desirable that it should remain unknown, the same mutatis mutandis, as above. 1. All persons /Every person/ who might be disposed to take advantage of the law, by claiming a right /at the hands of the Judge/ which could not be conferred upon them, but by imposing on some other person an obligation more onerous /burthensome/ than the right is advantageous. 2. All /Every/ persons burthened by the law, as above: viz: so long, and so long only as it remains unnoticed or unemployed by the persons favoured by it.

    Exception 3 d

    Case 3. Two laws: [...?] law; belonging to the substantive branch of the law, and that a good one: 2. a law belonging to the adjective branch of law; i: i: a law or rule of procedure; and that a bad one: the effect of it being, as often as it is applied, the destroying the effect of the abovementioned good law; the disfulfilling the prediction uttered by it - the violating the engagement taken by it: in the case of a penal law /of a penal law/, the giving [...?] to the mischievous act prohibited by it; the withdrawing the protection promised by it: and so mutatis mutandis in so far as the operation of the good substantive law in question is in favour of the defendant, and under punishment brought down upon him is the effect of the bad substantive law. so again mutatis mutandis on the part first of the plaintiff, and then of the defendant in the case where the good substantive law plays of the non penal or distributive class, as above described

    + a law, the function of which consists in the distribution of rights.
  • Title: [28[?] April 1805 Evidence Introd]
    Description: 28[?] April 1805

    Evidence

    Introd

    Ch. 10 Collateral

    ' Collateral [...?]

    ' Vexation from

    Ch. Ultimate collateral ends /end/ of procedure - avoidance of vexation from misdecision to the prejudice of the defendant.

    Besides the lots of vexation which, in greater or less number, and each with more or less weight, fall /have been seen falling/ upon every person /individual/ whom the institution /exhibition/ of a legal demand places in the condition of a defendant, there is one /one remains to be spoken of/ which consists /is constituted/ of the burthen which it is the ultimate and direct object of the demand to throw upon him the burthen of bearing the punishment sought by it to be imposed upon, administering the satisfaction or seeing it be[?] administered at his expence - or in a purely non-penal case, conferring or seeing conferred at his own expence the particular right which is the object /constitutes the subject and object/ of the demand.

    In each case, suppose the burthen the obligation due - suppose it of the number of those by the imposition of which the arrangements and predictions of /delivered by/ substantive law in that behalf will be made to take effect, thus vexation at the end of the [...?] account is not to be placed to the account of great[?] evil or inconvenience: for, if /suppose/ it to be not outweighed by some good produced by that the same operation, the fault lies in the substantive law by which the burthen was imposed, not in the adjustive branch of the law, the perfection of which consists in giving effect and fulfilment to the utmost to the predictions /arrangements predictions and engagements/ contained in the substantive branch wherever they may be: provided always that the mass of incidental inconvenience produced by the adjuctive law - by the course of procedure be not so great as to preponderate over the good produced /attached/ to the fulfilment of the substantive.