3 July 1805

Evidence

Introd. Jurisprudential

Ch. 3. Sources

''. 2. Dicta

There are some dicta that will serve for almost anything and serve to considerable experience in the way of precedence as for example "whatever offends against the order and good morals of society is an offence against the law of England, and punishable at common law. Jones v. Randall, I.T. in G.3 K.B. [...?] 383.

[...?] 1737.

Take again the case of libel

2. Take another instance. "If you except these appropriated cases, this court is the [...?] mores[?] of the people, and here the superintendary of offences contrà bonos mores: and upon this ground both for Charles Ledley and [...?], who had been guilty of offences against good manners, were prosecuted here."

3. If the reports that have been published of a dictum of very /rather/ recent date be to do be depended upon (laws of this kind are presented of course to chance for their existence) the definition /general idea/ attached to the word of a libel would of itself stand within place of a statute law of party[?] considerable extent. A libel says this doctrine is any published writing by which the feelings of any man may be hurt. According to a /another/ dictum of long standing, and of equal authority /equal in/ authority, superior in age "In cases of criminal prosecution the truth of falshood of the charge is /"was"/ totally immaterial, the charge itself being the libel". Of the two dicta laid together, just a Statutes being a priori [?] are always laid together, the result seems to be, that if a man about to publish a book in England would wish to be safe, a point personally to be gathered a preliminary point which it will be necessary for him will be, whether there be any body in the /any where/ country whose feelings would be hurt by it: or in other words who would be displeased with it.