091-284.xml

Title: [26 Jan y 1808 Codification - Jury]

Description: 26 Jan y 1808

Codification - Jury Trial

Jury Trial

Cutting[?]

Here then for the purpose of causing a man to be put to death, fr this purpose all men without distinction, the most ignorant included /not excluded are supposed not only to be apprized[?] of the existence of the law by which the being that dealt with is made the consequence of the act of cutting[?] accompanied with the bad intentions therein described - apprized of its existence , and to the effect in question approved of the meaning of the several words of which it is composed /by which it stands expressed/, the words cut and cutting among the rest. But when[?] for the purpose of sitting in judgment on an accusation charging a man with having committed the[?] forbidden act of this description, a man of a class superior /superior to the table[?] of the [...?]/ in point /respect/ of condition of life ad the portion of knowledge naturally attached to it, and on account of such [...?] superiority selected, is placed in the situation of a Judge, then it is that because not being he is not a professionally bred lawyer /Judge/, he is regarded by those who are professionally bred lawyers, as a man incapable of understanding ad not it to be treated [...?] what it is that cutting is /the word cut and cutting mean/. That the individual accused has been guilty of offending against the law by which a [...?] of death the act of cutting is [...?] accompanied with the evil [...?] in question made a capital offence is what they are indeed permitted to decide: but the act /word/ of cutting being one of the number of the words employed in the law, and the question concerning the import of it being accordingly a question of law and professionally bred lawyers the only persons capable /qualified/ of understanding /o decide in/ questions of law, and the Jury men[?] [...?] of them professionally bred lawyers shame it is that their having pronounced the accused guilty of the act of cutting accompanied with he evil instances in question is not a sufficient warrant for the declaring him guilty.

091-283.xml

Title: [26 Jan y 1808 Codification Jury Trial]

Description: 26 Jan y 1808

Codification Jury Trial

Jury Trial

Horse

Take as before the case of sale. Whether in virtue of the transaction between him[?] and the plaintiff on the subject of the horse, a sale of the horse took place, the defendant being bound to know is supposed to be capable of understanding and accordingly to have understood /accordingly/. Supposing the law as that subject to be the state[?] of statute law, and the word sale to stand as part of /one of the articles of/ that statute law, and the plaintiff's demand to be grounded in that article, the import /meaning/ of that word is supposed to be perfectly known to and understood by law, and he consequently to be a compleat and sufficient judge of it.

Take the same man and put him into a Jury box, invest him with the function or at least with part of the function of a Judge, whose duty it is to decide according to law, and in and by so doing to give effect and execution to the law, to give efficacy and fulfilment to the engagements taken by the law, immediately[?] all his knowledge of the law, of the very same portion of the law - all his capacity of forming a right judgment on the import of the words of which it is composed, is according to them to be supposed to vanish /have vanished/. Party to a sale between himself and A he knows what a sale is. party to a sale between A and B. he knows nothing about the matter. A /The/ man who has been occupied /employed/ in selling all his life long[?] /from his childhood/ and hose subsistence has depended upon it, knows not what selling is: to find a man who knows what selling is, you must[?] to a [...?], filled by a set of [...?], no one of whom perhaps, judicial delay excepted, ever sold any thing in his life.

091-287.xml

Title: [26 Jan y 1808 Codification - Jury]

Description: 26 Jan y 1808

Codification - Jury Trial

Jury Trial after Cutting

[...?] judges of law

If indeed in the station of a Juryman, of the [...?] of temporary Judge so called, a man is not to be considered as capable of understanding the import of those laws, by which in the instance of any of them in case of is failing to understand it liable to be put to death is[?] rescued[?], then indeed s far as the exercise of the function of a Juryman is concerned, there is no use in putting the rule of action into the state of real law instead of having it in the state of sham law. But if such e the effect or rather no-effect given to a decision pronounced by a Jury, the results seem to be that instead of applying a check to /remedy against/ misdecision the Jury box intervention of a [...?] set of temporary Judges /assessors/ so [...?], will in Scotland as in England serve as an engine of arbitrary power, as an instrument for facilitating misdecision, as a service for it which producing and when[?] produced.

Judging without a Jury, a Judge can not pronounce a wrong decision, without being in point of reputation[?] at least, and at the bar of public opinion responsible for it, punishable by los of reputation /[...?]/. Judging with a Jury, preserving the power in the way or other he eases /contrives/ himself of the yoke. For whatever justice, by [...?] /[...?]/ or misrepresentation he [?] [...?] certain to make them the instruments of, nobody is responsible for: not he, fr it is not his [...?]: not they, because they constitute so many services[?] to one another, and it is the characteristic property of the Jury-box that without exposing themselves to suffer in any shape, men may do in it what hey please.