date

Evidence 23 July 1805 Introd
Evidence

23 July 1805

Introd.

Ch. Perversion

2. Second mode of perversion. In this second mode the language perverted by the man of law is the language that issues out of his own lips. He says one thing, he means a different thing. The meaning annexed to these words by himself he keeps to himself: he keeps it to himself, lest the suitor, understanding what] His plan is, that the suitor, in pretence of disobedience or non-compliance with rules shall, to the profit of the Judge and his confederates, be punished or otherwise vexed. To give the appearance of a warrant for the punishment, the first /one/ thing necessary /needful/ is to generate the offence. For this purpose it is that the Judge annexes in secret a false meaning to his own words. He commands the suitor to do /perform/ a certain act: the act so commanded to the suitor is performed and /whereupon/ the suitor is punished or otherwise vexed. Punished? and for what? - for not having performed another act that never was commanded. The act for the non-performance of which the suitor is then punished is an act which was never communicated to him: an act which it was the case of the Judge should not be communicated to him. The meaning of the Judge of the Judge was to be believed, was that the act for the one performance of which the suitor is punished by him should have been performed by him. But had this meaning been communicated to the suitor the acts in question might have been performed by him; whereby the plan for /of/ punishing him as for the one performance of it would have been disappointed. Thus pretended insanity - it was therefore necessary should be kept a secret from the suitor; and to keep this secret, inexpedient than which willing could be more effectual was employed; a set of words are employed, which according to the meaning annexed to them by all mankind (men of [...?] excepted) signified quite a different sort of act, and act such as would not to any body have presented the idea of the act in question, for the non-performance of which the suitor is punished or otherwise vexed and at any rate plundered.
Similar Items
  • Title: [Evidence 6 July 1805 Introd]
    Description: Evidence

    6 July 1805

    Introd

    Ch. Perversion

    By technically-perverted language I understand such language as being in an active sense in common use among the people is taken in hand by lawyers and employed by them with a sense annexed to it different from any which at the time in question, is commonly annexed to it by the body of the people /in common use with the body of the people/. There is ambiguity: and the /fraud is the [...?] in the existence of it/ creation of it is the work of fraud. In every such case there is ambiguity, every such case there is deceit /fraud/.

    In the case of perverted language two modes of perversion require to be distinguished.

    1. In the one case the person by whom the perverted language is employed is of the body of the people. The man of law - the Judge, taking up /in hand/ this language, ascribes to it an import which not being annexed to those same words in ordinary usage, was to his own conviction not meant to be annexed to it by him who used it. Of this species of perversion the nature and effect is most conspicuous in the case of instruments of contract: such as Wills, Conveyances, and Agreements.

    Take particular[?] for example the case of a Will. Testator makes a will, by the terms of which taken together, to the full understanding of the Judge himself, he thought to have bequeathed an article to Ortho[?]. Seeing this, the judge adjudges it to Pscredo[?]. On pretence /On what pretence/ that those same words have a different meaning, in virtue of which had it been the meaning of Testator, it would have been bequeathed to Pscredo. A meaning? but in whose mind? By the supposition, not in the mind of the person in question - Testator: by whom the power which the man of law had professed to have put into his hands is exercised: but a secret meaning annexed or pretended to be /have been/ annexed to those same words by a different person /by a [...?] of [...?] reservation/ set of persons: or set of lawyers. In this way it is evident, that the Judge, in pretence of carrying into effect the will of the testator, makes a false will for him, and it is this false will alone that he carries into effect.
  • Title: [Evidence 23 July 1805 Introd]
    Description: Evidence

    23 July 1805

    Introd.

    Ch. Perversion

    Of this second mode of perversion the sort of judicial instrument called a Sub poenâ served on the defendant for the commencement of a suit and a Sub poenâ ad [...?], may afford a sufficiently appropriate example.

    In the case of a suit instituted in the Equity side of the Court of Exchequer the first notice that the Defendant has of the demand made upon him is by a Writ called a Writ of Sub poenâ. In this Writ the spokesman is the King himself: the Chief o the four Judges of the Court (the Chief Baron) is mentioned in the character of a Witness. A certain somebody, whose special title is not mentioned signs the Writ with his name - in this form - by the Baron Elect, Immediately afterwards upon the words At the suit of (the Plf) by bill[?] another person signs his name, and again without his special title. This second person is a sort of mixed character called a Sec[?] - Clerk - an officer of the Court, but employed in the character of a professional Agent or Attorney by the party: who besides this sort of special Attorney, is found to have another, a non-official one. We command ... you says the Writ ( the surplusage is here left out) that you appear before the Baron of our Exchequer at Westminster it then goes on and either specifies a day or [...?] or in a more ordinary state says "immediately after the receipt of this our Writ." .. to answer us concerning certain articles .... to be objected to you: Then comes in case of disobedience, the threat of a penalty /a [...?] threat of a penalty/ of 100: which is never levied or intended to be levied.

    In receipt of an address of this kind, it is superfluous to ask what is the meaning of this. Judges, [...?] /announced/ through their silence are in every case thus used, and that of course with their full knowledge, yet in no individual instance /occasion/ does any such Judge know of the use thus made of his name on that particular occasion. Wave this question then, comes another and more material one, if the man who has received the address what in consequence is he to do to be saved. Appear which is what he is commanded to do, he must not. If he does, nothing will /no articles will be here/ objected to him: neither by these Judges nor by any body else will any notice be taken of him, unless it be to laugh at him, to laugh at him for his credulity, in supposing it possible for English Judges to speak or write for any purpose but to deceive. But what they will do to him in consequence of the obedience thus paid to their commands is to punish him for disobedience. To avoid being so punished, he has one way, and but one: and that is to employ an Attorney to appear for him: nor yet to appear then and there, and before this Judge; but appear before somebody else, at that or another time, and at any rate at another place.
  • Title: [7 March 1807 Judicial Justice]
    Description: 7 March 1807

    Judicial Justice

    Letter V

    I. Shapes

    Misdecision may have for its subject the matter of law, or the matter of fact. In judicature, by whatever final decision is pronounced having for its subject an event or state of things considered as already past, comprehends necessarily these two points: that an act, an event, or other state of things alledged by the plaintiff as constituting the ground of his demand - of his right to that service which he prays may be rendered to him, of that act which he prays may be done, of that decision which he prays, may be pronounced in his favour, by the Judge, was at a particular point of time in existence:- this is the matter of fact:- and that such is the state of the law, the tenor of it real or imaginary, as to impose upon the Judge the obligation, or at the least invest him with the right, to render to the plaintiff the service so demanded.

    In like manner what is here said applies with equal propriety to any counter-allegation made on the Defendant's side.

    In the case where the ground of the plaintiff's demand is on the part of the Defendant some injury, by the infliction of which a transgression of the law has taken place - some act by which a command positive or negative, delivered or imagined to have been delivered by the legislator - the service demanded on the part of the Judge consists commonly in the performance of whatsoever operations are necessary to the causing the defendant to receive punishment, or the plaintiff to receive satisfaction (as for the injury) at his charge. In every such demand two allegations are necessarily involved: viz: that, by the defendant an act of a certain description had within some determinate length of time been performed: and that to the performance of an act of that description the law, real or imaginary, has, or at that time had, annexed an obligation or right on the part of the Judge, to do the act which the plaintiff prays him to do in consequence.