1 March 1808

Letter VI

Omissa & Facienda

II. no exclusion for interest

II. 3. No exclusion of evidence on the ground of interest.

The absurdity and ingenuity of the exclusion put on such a multiplicity of pretences[?] upon the light of evidence, is more commonly and impressively demonstrated by the argument from inconsistency than by any the more direct course. The subject of evidence coming in here only by the bye, a few limits though broad ones, are all that can be attested to it here.

1. By English jurisprudence /lawyers/ no interest, no motive of any kind is supposed to have /be capable of exercising/ any influence on man's conduct - or at least any sinister interest, but the love of the matter of wealth - commonly called the love of money, there is a being void of all social affection void of all dissocial affection - rendered with none but self-regarding ones, and those in respect of the object confined to many.

2. In the shape of pecuniary interest the only operative interest there[?] is no magnitude of amount which their rules with all their pretended strictness do not let[?] in[?] /are sufficient to [...?]/. Not many years ago died a duke, whose amount in [...?] came[?] in the public prints[?], estimated at ,150,000. Had the whole of it been in one estate, and that estate depending on the cause, the condition of [...?] to that estate would not have prevented the only son of that duke from being examined as a witness on that cause, either at the instance[?] of his fallow or at the instance of a party on the other side.

But supposing the estate on the son, though liable to be taken from him at any time by the operation of [...?] impression called a receiver, then[?] though instead of the ,180,000 a year the estate was not worth so many [...?] out hand[?], the testimony would not at the instance of the father have been admissible.