Did you mean id:"059-134.xml"?

date

[059-134 pinned to this folio] 13
[059-134 pinned to this folio]

13 Apr. 1803

Evidence

Ends

Important as the objects of this class are, they can not with propriety be spoken of /considered/ as among the main objects of the system of procedure, and for this plain reason: they would be but the more effectually provided for, were there no such system in existence. The inconveniences to be guarded against - application of punishment where not due - imposition of the burthens /obligations/ respectively attendant on the application of satisfaction and on the collation of rights where not due the inconveniences the avoidance of which branches out into those three objects - are as so many pitfalls into which the defendant is liable to be pushed in the course of his forced excursion along this road, and against which /from which/ it is the business of the legislator and the judge to guard him by proper fences. But in that particular character his security would be the more entire, howsoever in his quality of a member of the community it would be diminished, if there were no such road through /along/ which he could be dragged.

Another class of collateral objects of procedure, still wider of the main road than the foregoing ones, the inconveniences of the 2 d order, are expence and vexation. They stand excluded from the class of main objects by the consideration just spoken of as excluding the others.

The same observation applies - and with equally evident propriety - to the inconveniences of the 3 d order - delay and precipitation.

In a practical view the use of the distinction is, in English Jurisprudence confined to the three collateral objects of the first order; and more particularly to non-application of punishment where not due. By the almost exclusive attention bestowed upon this one object, one would almost suppose it to have been taken for the main and primary end /object/ of the system of procedure: the true main ends /objects/ punishment and satisfaction for the mischief of the offence being on so many occasions and in so conspicuous a degree sacrificed to it.
Similar Items
  • Title: [28 June 1804 Procedure D 16]
    Description: 28 June 1804

    Procedure D

    16 (1)

    Ends

    Ch.1

    '.4. Particular Collateral termination[?]

    '.4. Particular collateral ends of procedure:- consisting in the avoidance of the ultimate evils producible by error in the pursiot of the main ends. avoidance to give birth to punishment, right or satisfaction where undue

    The several objects above spoken of under the name /description/ of the particular of specific ends of procedure, being branches of the main end, viz. giving effect and fulfilment to the fulfilment of the several predictions contained in /delivered by/ the substantive law, are all of them, it may be observed of a positive case: the events respectively endeavoured to be produced by a course of procedure directed to these ends, being so many positive events: the propositions by which the events or results in question would be [...?], being so many affirmative propositions:- punishment due has been applied: the right due has been confirmed: the satisfaction due has been administered. The generic end in question being the main end of procedure, these specific ends, being branches of that main end, are themselves so many main though specific ends.

    The specific ends we now come to speak of are so many branches of the object already spoken of /brought to view/ under the designation /name/ of the collateral general end. That generic end being of the negative cast, these specific ends will each of them be so too.

    As the description of the generic collateral end was determined by that of the main end out of which it has been seen to spring, so will the description of these branches of the one be respectively determined by that of the corresponding branches of the other.
  • Title: [29 June 1804 Procedure C 15]
    Description: 29 June 1804

    Procedure C

    15 (6)

    Ends

    '.3. Partic r Collateral termination[?]

    For the sake of uniformity, viz: for the purpose of enabling these three particular ends to be spoken of with the greater facility in [...?] with those which will successfully be brought to view, there will be a convenience in bringing to view three evils as respectively opposite and correspondent to the /these/ above three specific ends. Each end may in this case /way/ be said to consist in the negation or avoidance of its oppostie and correspondent evil. In the former case /mode/ the end (i.e. the proportion cumulative of the end) will be /was/ brought to view in what nay be called its positive or affirmative form /shape/ or dress /garb/: in the other / this other mode, it is brought to view/, in a negative form.

    That[?] main End in the affirmative form - application of punishment where due. The same third end in the negative form - avoiding the evil consisting in the non-application of punishment, where due.

    Second main end in the affirmative form. Collation of rights where due The same third end in the negative form - avoiding the evil consisting in the non-collation of rights, where due.

    Third Main End in the affirmative form - administration of satisfaction where due.

    The same third end in the negative form - avoiding the evil consisting in the non-administration of satisfaction, where due.
  • Title: [12 June 1804 Procedure 11]
    Description: 12 June 1804

    Procedure

    11 (5)

    Ends

    Ch.1

    3. Particular Main Ends

    In vain would rights of either kind - and in particular consummated rights be created and conferred by the legislator - in vain would the correspondent sort of offences be created - the correspondent obligations imposed - if to the violation of these rights - to the commission of these offences - to the branch of these obligations - punishment, in some shape or other, were not annexed. Punishment taken by itself as an evil: but considered as necessary to the warding off some greater evil, it operates, to the amount of the differences, as a good. But in so far as it is a good, the absence of it - the non-application of it - is an evil /a mischief - an inconvenience/. Wheresoever an offence has been committed, punishment, in some shape of other, exception made for these cases in which pardon is proper /the particular cases which call for pardon +/ may be stated as .said to be/ these: the non-application of it an inconvenience /an evil a mischief/.

    Thus in subordination to the main general end of procedure /the system of procedure, we have on //a// particular end/ - Application of punishment where due application of evil under the name of punishment in a case where no punishment is due is besides the immediate evil attained with a deplorable train of evil consequences. " Hence comes another particular end subordinate to the main (a) general end of procedure: avoiding to apply punishment where not due /undue/.

    + Introd. Ch.│ │ p.│ │

    Dum.[?]

    " Dum.[?]

     (a) or rather collateral?