date

18[?] May 1805 Evidence Note
18[?] May 1805

Evidence

Note

Introd

Ch 4. [...?] Ends

or Ch.1. Ends

With the ends of procedure, coincide in the main, but /though/ not compleatly, the ends of judicature: in point of extent the latter expression wants something, though not much, of being equal to the former - of the mischief produced /that will be seen/ by a [...?] bad system of procedure, it is but a part that is produced by judicature, by bad judicature, by misdecision. Of the mischief producible by misdecision no small part it will be seen is equally producible without misdecision, without decision, for want of decision: on the part of the Judge, by non-decision; on the part of him who has been or should have been demandant, by desistment, by non-demand. To him who has a just cause of demand the worst thing /event/ indeed that can happen is to be subjected to the vexation and expense attached to the station of demandant, and after all not receive the service /obtain the fruit of it/ that is his due. But to find the doors of justice shut against him, and thus to be deprived of his right whatsoever it may be, is by no means a matter of indifference. In the lot of vexation and expense attached to the suit lies /consists/ the difference, and the only difference.

To the station of demandant there is no sort of injury, juridical vexation and expense excepted, that may not be done without misdecision, without judicature, as well as by misdecision, by means of judicature.

Where there is no demand, it may be said[?], there is no procedure, no judicial procedure. True: but where the cause of the non-existence of the demand is to be found in the system of procedure, in so far it is evident, does the system fail of being adapted to the fulfilment of the correspondent end:
Similar Items
  • Title: [18 May 1805 Evidence Introd]
    Description: 18 May 1805

    Evidence

    Introd.

    ch. Procedure

    ' Effects of no of suits

    Effects of a Reform in the number of suits.

    Misdecision is one cause of the contravention of the ends of procedure, whether by non-fulfilment of direct ends, or by the production of one not apposite to a collateral end misdecision is a cause, and the most prominent cause. It is however not the only cause. Three other causes are alike /equally/ adequate to the production of this effect: 1. on the part of the judge non-decision: 2. on the part of the party interested in the fulfilment /accomplishment/ of the substantive law, 2. non-demand, or 3. desistmemt.

    When misdecision is the cause, the station of the demandant and that of the defendant are alike exposed to receive /experience/ /bear the brunt/ the overwhelming force of the mischievous effect. Both ends of justice are alike exposed to be contravened by it: the direct end, and the ultimate collateral end.

    When non-decision is the cause, the station of the demandant is that one of the two that is most obviously and most frequently exposed to receive the damage: so long as /since/ the cause /suit/ continues undecided, the demandant fails of obtaining the service, which was the subject of /prayed for by/ his demand.

    Not that the station of defendant is /is altogether/ in all cases altogether unaffected by mischief /exempt from damage/ flowing from the same source. So long as the cause continues even though no further steps /operations/ with the attendant expences and vexations, be taken in it, vexation, in the shape of anxiety, still continues.

    Where non-demand is the cause, the station of defendant, that is of him, who if in the instance in question the direct end of justice had been /to be/ fulfilled would have been demandant, is the only one of the two opposite stations the only one on which any sensible portion of the misfortune falls: punishment, satisfaction, propriety, right whatever it be, he fails of obtaining the object which is his due. To injustice or suffering from this source, the station of defendant is not in any degree exposed. In respect of the consequence of the demand, no room for vexation, for anxiety; for, by the supposition, no demand hath as yet been made.
  • Title: [4 July 1804 Procedure & Evidence]
    Description: 4 July 1804

    Procedure & Evidence

    Note Evils causes

    3d order

    '.3 Non-decision

    Note (a)

    (a) A few instances /A rare and heteroclite sort of case/ will be mentioned /brought to view/ in its place /further on/ /in proper ----/, in which a cause may be, and is sometimes /is,/ carried on without a complainant /demandant/ the same person ---ling /adding/ the function of the plaintiff to the office of the judge /that of the judge/.

    Setting aside this /that/ heteroclite sort of case, so long as there is no demandant, and thence no demand, there can not be any decision. no decision either on that side or the ---- can take place /be pronounced/ never ---- takes place. With regard to the ------ of the parties in respect of the result of the suit, it is exactly the same, setting aside the incidental evils of vexation and expence, as it would be if the complaint having been instituted, a wrongful decision /adverse/ to the prejudice of the plffs side had been pronounced.

    But to an individual whose station is on the plaintiff's side /of the demandant/ - to an individual who stands in need of a service to be rendered to him by the judge, the effect of non-decision, which so long as it lasts, is exactly to same as that of wrongful decision - a decision importing a wrongful refusal to render him that service.
  • Title: [19 May 1805 Evidence Introd]
    Description: 19 May 1805

    Evidence

    Introd.

    Ch. False Ends. Judge

    ' 3. Opposition Mode

    In this way we have seen the Judge deriving his double advantage from non-demand, [...?], and non-decision, with their attendant evils, the results of the tax he has imposed: how the same advantage has been /is/ extracted by him from another cause of those same evils misdecision, remains to be explained. The case of operations, unnecessary /useless/ in themselves, rendered necessary by institution, by his own opposition[?] it[?] made for the purpose, have already been brought to view. But by what means have they been rendered /[...?]/ necessary? - by appointing, as the punishment of law[?] that one of the parties who shall have failed in the performance of them, the loss of his cause. But every such decision, being thus up on the face of it undue, is a decision in the talk[?] of one or more of six out of the seven ends of justice: if the party [...?] punishment of the demandant, one or more of those direct[?] ends: of the defendant, one or more of those ultimate collateral ends.

    Misdecision through what is called corruption might here be /have been/ added: but misdecision from any such source belongs not to the /by any particular/ arrangement the fundamentally vicious arrangement here in question. It affords not any peculiar tacility /[...?]/ to misdecision from that source: under this system misdecision through corruption is not less exposed to punishment, less exposed to detection than under any other /the [...?]/. it acts rather as an obstacle to misdecision: for the more emolument a man has it in his power without exposing himself to punishment, or so much as to reproach /shame/, the less need has he to expose himself to punishment in pursuit of it.