3 May 1805

Evidence

Introd.

Ch.5. Collateral Incidental

'.2 Limitations

'. Limitations necessary to the description of these evils.

First incidental collateral end - avoidance of vexation understand where[?] unnecessary or preponderant

/Meantime/ Of these several evils there is not one[?] which, in some quantity or other is not inseparably attached to the system of procedure - to every[?] suit without exception to which it can happen to be carried on under the system of arrangements of which that system is composed. To propose for an end of procedure simply and crudely - to propose in that character, without limitation - the compleat avoidance of vexation, of expence of delay - would be to propose as an object of endeavour - a good - the attainment of which is upon the face of it impossible. Important therefore as it is /Much therefore as it is to be wished/ that these evils should as much as possible be avoided and averted, it is not till after some limitation has been set to the description of them that the avoidance of them can be stated as a rational object of human endeavour /legislative industry/.

For the description of this limitation two considerations present themselves.)

Suppose the evil in question, suppose it either in the whole, or in any part of it, not necessary to the production of the good - in the pursuit of which it is liable to be produced: it is then so much pure evil: and in that character the possibility as well as propriety of endeavouring to exclude it, follows of course. First limitation concerning[?] the description of the evil to be avoided; the [...?] [...?] if taken, applied by the epithet unnecessary: instead of vexation simply, say vexation unnecessary, vexation where unnecessary: - and so of the rest[?]

+ Introd. Ch. Cases unmixt[?] for punishment.