1
results found in
67 ms
Page 1
of 1
13 Feb y 1807
+ C
To III. Facienda
Trial[?] Letter IV
Resolut. 6.7.8.9
Juries
And now my Lord, that, in this single article - denial of justice - the price paid by the people for the services rendered /supposed to be rendered/ to them by I know not what support supposed to be given to I know not what by these retainers[?] of justice, may be the more clearly understood, I venture to submitt to Your Lordship a concluding proposition which is this -
Supposing the decisions now given in the way of technical procedure to be all /uniformly/ right - supposing that under natural procedure if substituted to technical they would be all wrong <...> at the same time. Protesting that in the technical system there are causes of misdecision to a great extent, and under the natural none at all - yet for argument sake I will suppose that the decisions habitually given at present in the way of technical procedure are all right - and that had they been given in the way of natural procedure they would have been all wrong - erroneous in the highest morally possible degree: assuming on the other hand, at the same time, what the 43 English Courts of Conscience Debts so well entitle me to assume for England, and the Small Debt Court Act (to G.3.6 with the Certificate of the Lord President and Mr Hutchinson in its favour for Scotland, viz: that to the extent of its jurisdiction in the two kingdoms natural procedure does at present fulfill the ends of justice /even under this extravagantly/. This being the supposition unfavourable as it is, and to the degree of stark absurdity, still any proposition is -, that the benefit, resulting from the substitution of the natural system to the technical, would be clear and incontestable.
Vexation and expense out of the question, denial of justice is neither more nor less than misdecision to the prejudice of the plaintiff's side: a debt of 40' being due to me, if, for want of a Court in which I can recover it without paying more than 40', I give it up, here my loss is 40': if by an unjust decision of any such Court it were refused to me, still my loss, exclusive of the vexation and expense as above[?] would be the 40' and no more. But the number of cases in a year in which misdecision could take place, supposing all the causes now decided in the technical mode were decided and misdecided in the natural mode, would as above not exceed 4000: whereas upon the demands under 40' above, the number of cases in which denial of justice takes place runs as high as 583,338.
Similar Items
-
Title: [4 Feb y 1807 Letter IV Juries]Description: 4 Feb y 1807 Letter IV Juries L d Presid t 2. For the purpose of the argument I will admitt two things. One is that the technical justice the sort of justice which /in the administration of which/ the Right Honourable President bears so distinguished a part - this technical justice, high priced as it is, dilatory, vexatious and expensive without which it could not be so good as it is is so good so perfect, that of all the causes /decisions/ that are determined /pronounced/ according to /by/ it from year's end to year's end, those which are reserved in the House of Lords (about half of these that are [...?] from) being, as his Lordship pleases included or not included, there is not one that is not right, and in every point imaginable as pure from the charge of mis-decision as possible. And to this position /proposition/ at any rate, I shall not, I flatter myself find any objection on his Lordship's part. Another /The other/ is that of all these causes there is not one that, were it to be d in respect of security against misdecision on natural Justice in question is so bad, that of all the causes decided on such perfection under technical justice /procedure/, there is not one that would not be decided as badly as it was /is/ possible for a cause to be decided, under Natural procedure.
-
Title: [26 Oct 1807 Eldons Bill '.11]Description: 26 Oct 1807 Eldons Bill '.11 Procedure the System What makes the example so much the more instructive /richer/ in instruction is that the same Courts which afford /present/ the spectacle of diversity of procedure, and of the mischiefs flowing from it, present the example of competition, and of the minuteness of the advantages, if any that have been derived from it. If amongst them any such contention had ever prevailed as which should do most for furthering the ends of justice they would long ago have arrived all of them at that simplicity that undilatory unvexatious unexpensive and at the same time /but the more/ efficient simplicity which has all along characterised the system /method/ of the Small Debt Courts, the Courts of Justices of the Peace sitting out of the Sessions[?] and the other Courts of Natural Procedure: they would long have arrived at it /that goal/, or rather they never would have swerved from it: so that /insomuch/ unexpensiveness, unvexatiousness, and so far as depended upon the system undilatoriness, being in those /these/ high Courts as in the other petty Courts in all of them alike at the pitch of perfection, the only object of contention would have been as between individuals and individuals, on each individual occasion, which Judge or set of Judges should by staving off the time for decision produce least factitious delay, be most sincerely anxious to save the suitors on both sides from all unnecessary expense [...?] [...?] most effectual that by that the operation of justice no unnecessary vexation be inflicted either on the suitors on either side or on third persons, ad be most solicitously and successively attentive to avoid doing /lending his hand to/ any of those diversified injuries to which the people in the character of suitors are subjected by erroneous decisions /misdecision/ decisions and denial of justice /to the prejudice either of the plaintiff or of the defendant's side/.
-
Title: [14 Febr y 1807 1 [...?] Letter]Description: 14 Febr y 1807 1 [...?] Letter IV Resolut. 6.7.8.9 Juries 2. Next as to ease. ││ It rids them of all causes that do not afford this profit: a vast majority: giving to Judges ease, to suitors - no, my Lord:- to the people who ought to have been and are not admitted in the character of suitors, denial of justice. And this, without depriving them of /leaving to them notwithstanding/ a prodigious number of causes in which /justice administer/ on the terms in which it is administered, justice is much worse, so far as individual parties are concerned than denial of justice: causes in which not to speak of the ten fold /ten or twenty fold/ loss of him who is said to gain /lose/ the cause, even the gainer loses, the gainers and only real gainers are the lawyers. /Judge and C o his[?] junior[?] partners/ True it is, that under the existing technical system, the sum in demand being given say 40', say twice ,40, misdecision to the prejudice of the plaintiff's side is a great deal worse than simple denial of justice! Worse:-yes.: but what is it that makes it so? It is the technical system itself, with its manufactured mass of delay, vexation and expense. (In the account here supposed the difference therefore has no place on the side of the natural system.) In the supposed case, the technical system is vanished: the natural has every where taken its place.
1
results found.
Page 1
of 1