date

July 1807 11 Letter V
July 1807

11

Letter V

II. Litigation promoted

3. Under the article of proximity, that is by delay, you may keep down the value of satisfaction, if possible with still less reserve than under the article of certainty. As to the making of delay for this purpose, see the directions given as above for the making it for all purposes.

As to the chances of the injured party's right to satisfaction being destroyed by this engine, they are still more numerous and unscrutable than in the case of uncertainty, produced as above. Then comes the intermediate possession which produces a sure profit to the wrongdoer (the intermediate possessor) and to the party wronged a sure damage and deduction from the value of his claim for receiving the satisfaction. Even to his lawyers the task of comprehending them would be difficult, in that of making him comprehend them an impossible one. That some delays, and even to an indefinite length, may happen in here and there an instance to be necessary, is what every man knows or ought to know: and under favour of these unavoidable ones, the legislature and the people not knowing when to draw the line, have allowed you to make as long and as many delays as you have a mind, for your own use.
Similar Items
  • Title: [4 July 1807 10 Letter V]
    Description: 4 July 1807

    10

    Letter V

    II. Litigation promoted

    Never object to this: say it makes no difference: the more[?] of this [...?] the better the more injustice the more[?] capital punishments the better: it makes [...?] [...?] to learning[?] and to reasonable men[?] [...?].

    Referring to the party wronged, satisfaction for the intermediate damage, you thereby compliment the wrongdoer with correspondent intermediate profit /postium connetande[?]/. Do so to as great an extent as possible.

    2. In the article of certainty you may keep down satisfaction, that is the value of it, with less resource[?].

    Take any casualties choosing them of that sort which are sure to happen at some time or other, take of such casualties the more the better, and give to each of these the effect of putting an end to the plaintiff's right to satisfaction: death of the wrongdoer, and death of the party wronged may serve for example. The sort of persons fit for your purpose will note all these chances, calculate upon them, and committ the wrong as often as the calculation turns out favourable: the individuals marked out for victim will think no more of them, than hitherto the legislature has done. Burying the right to satisfaction for the wrong in the same grave with the author secures the profit of it to those who are most dear to them. When thinking whether to sue or no, the injured plaintiff will never suspect that his right may be thus killed; and his lawyers know better than to put any such notions into his head. Burying it in the same grave with the party wronged, and adds to the account of the murders not often suspected scarce ever discovered, never punished, and in the profit of which you enjoy your share, without any of the reproach.

    In deposition of necessary evidence, you have an event by which as often as it takes place, whatever right depended on it is destroyed of course and without any thing done by you to kill it. What you have to do is to throw obstructions in the way of the collection of the evidence, make it as uncertain as possible when the production of it can be enforced and when not. For every thing else so the directions for the production of uncertainty in general, and of delay in general:- the longer the definitive productive[?] of the evidence can be staved off, the longer the time given to it to die in.
  • Title: [12 July 1807 (11) Letter V]
    Description: 12 July 1807

    (11)

    Letter V

    III. Litigat. prevet.

    III. Directions for the prevention of malâ fide wrongs and eventual malâ fide defence on the part of a defendant combating for success through indigence on the other side.

    Take away all factitious expence and vexation: in case of necessity provide for the defraying of the necessary mass of expence at the charge of some fund other than of the purse of the indigent individual in each case. See below Directions concerning malâ fide Plaintiffs.

    IV. Directions for the prevention of malâ fide wrongs and eventual malâ fide defence on the part of a defendant combating for intermediate profit by delay.

    1. Do away all such factitious delays as you find already established under and by the existing system: to do this you must substitute in every Court of judicature the natural system to the existing modification of the technical.

    2. In regard to such facititious delays as even under the natural system it might be in the power of a defendant, malâ fide or even bonâ fide, to produce, be careful to take away, in every shape, all possible profit from the delay; and in particular so ordering matters, that whatsoever be the loss produced by the delay to the party on the other side, viz. on the plaintiff's, full satisfaction shall be made to him for it at the defendant's expence.
  • Title: [PRIVATE 4 July 1807 + B]
    Description: PRIVATE

    4 July 1807

    + B

    Scotch Reform 8

    2 o

    Letter V

    II. Litigat. promoted

    Your object is to encourage litigation: wrongs are of no use any further then as litigation is brought on, and kept up. To keep up litigation you must mind and be careful to keep down as much as possible every thing that can operate as a check to litigation: every sort of burthen or unpleasant obligation that in case of ill success in the suit it can happen to pass on the wrongdoer.

    What you have to aim at is that to as great an extent as possible, every man may derive, or what to you comes to the same thing, expect to derive, a neat profit from his own wrong. To the purpose:

    Momento the 1 o /Memoranda[?]/. Keep down satisfaction: keep down the value of it in magnitude as far as you can, and where in that line you can go no further, in point of certainty and proximity.

    Where the wrong for which the plaintiff demands satisfaction is it a wrong of commission? satisfaction if adequate consists in affording adequate reparation for the damage: is it a wrong of omission? satisfaction, if adequate, consists in doing that which ought to have been done, with reparation for the intermediate damage by the omission reckoning from the moment when the thing ought to have been done to the time when that or what is equivalent is done.

    To p. 9

    From p. 9

    In respect of magnitude untoward circumstances prevent your keeping it down in all cases so much as could be wished.

    1. So far indeed as concerns things movable it will be your fault if any man has any thing that he can call his own. What you give him will be not the thing itself, but whatever sum of money a company of 12 men who are in a hurry for their dinner and who never saw the thing, think fit to value it at.

    2. Extending this to things unmovable, would neither have been practicable nor perhaps eligible. As often as in this shape one man's property is wanted for the use of another, comes a separate law with its eventual set of suits; and the law itself makes fees.