Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow SECTION XXIV.: EXPENSE OF THE COURT, HOW PROVIDED FOR. - The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 3

Return to Title Page for The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 3

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Economics
Subject Area: Political Theory
Subject Area: Law

SECTION XXIV.: EXPENSE OF THE COURT, HOW PROVIDED FOR. - Jeremy Bentham, The Works of Jeremy Bentham, vol. 3 [1843]

Edition used:

The Works of Jeremy Bentham, published under the Superintendence of his Executor, John Bowring (Edinburgh: William Tait, 1838-1843). 11 vols. Vol. 3.

Part of: The Works of Jeremy Bentham, 11 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


SECTION XXIV.

EXPENSE OF THE COURT, HOW PROVIDED FOR.

Enactive.

Art. 1. At the charge of the public revenue, disposal of which is made by the Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland, will the whole expense of the Dispatch Court be defrayed.

Ratiocinative.

Art. 1*. Of the here-proposed institution it is a principle, that of the remuneration received by the public functionaries employed, no part shall be paid by a party on either side of the suit, but the whole by Government: in the same manner as most other parts of the national expenditure. On the contrary, under the existing system, paid, on the whole or in great part, at the expense of the suitors, are the functionaries belonging to the Equity Courts. Instead of leaving the several subject-matters of the suit in the hands in which they are at present deposited, and operating upon them while in the hands of the functionaries of the Equity Courts, why remove them into the hands of the Dispatch Court Judge? Answer, as above:—If, after a suit has been taken out of the hands of an Equity Judge, any subject-matter of the suit were to remain in the hands of his subordinates, or any of them, the consequence would be, that whatsoever disposition came to be made thereof, need would from time to time have place for some operation to be performed in relation thereto by this or that one of those same subordinates. Either those which such subordinate had been accustomed to do no otherwise than on receipt of a fee, he would have to do without receiving remuneration in that or any other shape, or fees such as he would have received otherwise will be to be received by him at the expense either of the suitor, or, as above, of Government. Compelling him to do without remuneration that for which by legal practice he had been authorised to expect remuneration, would be an infringement of the non-disappointment principle, and would afford a natural, nor that an altogether ungrounded matter of complaint on the score of injustice. Take the subject-matter out of his hands, this cause of complaint has no place. True it is, the pecuniary loss to him is the same in the one case as in the other. But on the other hand, in the one case, the labour, such as it is, continues to be imposed upon him—imposed upon him without his being paid for it. But what is more material is—that he is in no other state than he would be in if it were by compromise, or by impoverishment of the parties on one or both sides, that the cessation were produced: and it will be hard to say, that the State ought to be inhibited from granting to parties that cessation of suffering which they would not be inhibited from granting to themselves: or that the Government having, by its unapt arrangements, for the sake of its creatures, begun to administer to the parties impoverished something under the name of justice, should be bound, merely for the sake of those its functionaries, to do the suitors evil to an amount much more than equivalent to the good thereby done to those same creatures. As to the fees, were the payment of them to be continued, the continuance of the expense would not be the only evil produced. To it would be added that of the delay. For, in each instance, when a fee is received, it is on the occasion of some operation performed: if the payment of the fees be continued, so must be the performance of the several operations coming to be performed on the several successive occasions.

Enactive.

Art. 2. Fund out of which the expense of the Dispatch Court will be provided for,—the Consolidated Fund.

Art. 3. An auxiliary extraordinary and specific fund, to be drawn upon in aid and relief of the above-mentioned general and ordinary fund, will be composed of the produce of such fines, or say mulcts, as will by the Judge have been imposed upon and exacted from offenders, or say transgressors or delinquents, in respect of all such offences, or say acts of transgression or delinquency, on the occasion and in consideration of and punishment for which such fines will respectively have been imposed.

For the list of these same offences, see Section VI. Judge’s Powers, &c. art. 34.

Ratiocinative.

Art. 3*.—i. So far from being a source of expenditure, the Dispatch Court, proceeding on the principle in that section indicated, may reasonably be expected to be, and ought to be endeavoured to be made, a source of revenue. So also, and thereby, of moral melioration.

ii. Consideration had of the prodigious amount to which, under the existing practice, falsehood—wilful falsehood, as well with oath as without oath,—has place, it is but too certain that, notwithstanding the repressive power of the arrangements herein above provided, it will at the outset have place to a very extensive amount on the part of persons of all degrees of opulence in the several capacities of suitors and witnesses.

iii. But in each such instance, no sooner is it become manifest, in the eyes of the Judge, and as he will perceive in the eyes of all the bystanders, that delinquency in this shape has had place, than under Section VI. the delinquent will be detained in the Justice Chamber, interrogated as to his pecuniary circumstances, and if the Judge sees reason, incarcerated, and not liberated till he has paid the sum which, by the Mulcting Mandate* he has been ordered to pay: and this process may be continued by the examination of extraneous witnesses in the case of delinquency in this shape, exactly as in the case of delinquency in any other shape.

iv. As to the amount of the mulct in each individual case, the grounds upon which it is to be fixed have been already pointed out in Section VI. art. 52, and following. If from an individual the aggregate of whose property amounts to no more than £5, it is right and justifiable for the Judge to exact on the score of delinquency in any shape such his £5,—from an individual the aggregate of whose property amounts to £500,000, can it be otherwise than right and justifiable for that same Judge, on the score of delinquency in that same shape, to exact such his £500,000?

v. True it is, that wrong and unjustifiable it would be, if into the pocket of the Judge, money to his own use being in both cases exacted by him, money to a greater amount were exacted in the case of the £500,000 than in the case of the £5. But by the Dispatch Court Judge no money would to his own use be exigible or receivable in either case, or in any case.

vi. Not on the absolute, but on the relative quantity (need it be said?) of the money exacted from a person on the score of delinquency and punishment, depends the quantity of the suffering produced by the loss:—on the relative quantity, relation being had to his pecuniary circumstances.

vii. Almost too obvious and too manifestly incontestable is the truth of this position, to admit of its being thus in a direct way laid down in the character of a ground of proceeding. Laid down, however, it must be;—to such a degree and to such an extent, by sinister interest, and interest-begotten and authority-begotten prejudice, have at all times the eyes of public men—of the ruling and influential few—been blinded to it.

viii. This blindness,—if real, self-regard has it for its efficient cause: if apparent only, hypocrisy for its accompaniment.

ix. In the direct and exact proportion to his opulence is the rich and influential man a gainer by the success with which this delusive rule, having been received as if prescribed by justice, is applied to practice.

x. In this same proportion, if besides being a depredator he is an oppressor—a hater of those under him, as well as an inordinate and too passionate self-lover,—is the pleasure he derives from the thoughts of the suffering of which on their part it is productive.

xi.Excessive fines ought not to be imposed:”—by these words is expression given to one of the positions, propositions, aphorisms, or axioms, contained in the famous Declaration of Rights, to which the Revolution of 1688 gave birth. And the absolute is the sense in which we see by Judges of the Supreme Criminal Court (as in one sense it is so aptly called,) it has ever since been interpreted. And of the interpretation thus put upon it, what have been the efficient causes? One negative cause, this:—by this outward show of mercy nothing has been lost to the Judge: from a fine to the largest amount no more money goes into his pocket than from a fine to the smallest amount.*

SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS:—

  • I. BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY.
  • II. HENCEFORWARD DISPATCH COURT.

[* ]See Schedule No. XXIX.

[* ]1. Behold in the provisions contained in the foregoing articles, fresh occasion and fuel for explosions of learned gas, in addition to those which by the self-extensive power conferred on the Judge will have been elicited.

2. First comes—“Violation of the Declaration of Rights!” But on this spitfire, a wet blanket has already been cast, and the noxiousness of the explosion taken away.

3. Of the next, and perhaps last, the sound may be to this effect:—See the would-be extortioner! behold in him Empson out-empsonized! Dudley out-dudleyfied! What these men practised on a minute scale, this man—such is his audacity!—recommends to be practised on an infinite—a boundless scale.

4. To these virtuous accusations behold answers two—each of them sufficient for grounding a verdict of not guilty upon: What is here proposed is simply, whatsoever suffering it is deemed by the Judge proper to be produced on the part of the offender, to give to it this quality, this shape; not to make addition to it. Empson and Dudley having for their object, the procuring for their royal employer money as much as possible, produced suffering which but for the desire of the money would not have been produced.

5. Sole pocket into which it is proposed the money should go, the pocket of the whole community: into the pocket of the King;—technicaliter et grimgribberaliter, to the surveyor of the green wax;—Anglicè, to the pocket of the King, after having been told over a gridiron by this creature of one of his ministers, not a farthing of it.

6. In the breast of the delinquent, whatsoever be the lot of suffering produced, in the breasts of tax-payers in indefinite and unascertainable multitude,—namely, the poor among the tax-payers,—a much larger quantity will be saved.

7. In the breast of the Judge, no assignable motive, inducement, or temptation, to give to such his power, on any occasion, any abusive exercise, has place, more than whatsoever would have place if to the suffering were given any other imaginable shape.

8. In the day which gave birth to the statute by which a stigma was imprinted on the practice of imposing “excessive fines,” fresh in all memories was the sentence by which on Hampden the second, son and heir of Hampden the first, a fine of £40,000 was imposed:—a sum, in those days of comparatively small taxation, equal in value to three or four times the nominal amount of the present day. In that state of things, powers such as those hereinabove proposed would have been pregnant with a mass of mischief, protestations against which could not have been too energetic. The money exacted would have gone, the whole of it, into the pockets of a spendthrift King: and being dislocable at pleasure, the occupants of the bench of justice were the breath of the nostrils of him whose seal was on them,—the occupant of the throne. A pair of Empsons, and another of Dudleys, might have composed the population of the King’s Bench; and under a Charles the Second or a James the Second, the rapacity of the Seventh and the profusion of the Eighth Henry might at one and the same time have been polluting the same throne.

9. True it is, that for giving to the mass of evil that completeness and perfection which the proposed powers would have given, the power of scrutinizing by oral examination the state of the offender’s pecuniary circumstances would still have been necessary. True it also is, that grave considerations—considerations such as in the mind of a Lord Eldon were capable of breeding great doubts,—would have opposed a bar of no mean strength to the assumption of such a power. For, as may be seen in the Petitions for Justice, of an exclusion put upon this element of natural procedure was formed the key-stone of the feegathering system: and by every instance of it employed in practice, what would be regarded as a dangerous precedent—a bad precedent—would have been set:—a practice of which no more than one exemplification,—namely, that afforded by the justification of bail,—had been suffered to creep in.

10. Of bringing these things to view, what (it may be asked) is the purpose? Answer, this: To render it plain and incontestable, that against the cluster of powers proposed to be united in the hands of the Judge, no valid objection can be deduced from that same Declaration of Rights: for that whatsoever beneficial tendency is commonly regarded as being possessed by it, is in the proposed authority of the Dispatch Court carried into effect: and that the security which in that case was imperfect, and given to no more than a few, is in this case perfect, and given to all: that in that state of things, the power of exacting money, of mulcting without stint, connected with the equally unlimited power of eliciting evidence of the state of pecuniary circumssances, would to a certainty have been abused, and to an extent destructive of all property: whereas in the present state of things under the here-proposed checks, the certainty is, that such abuse could not have place in any degree.

11. So much for the certainty of revenue: now as to the probable amount of it. Neither within a hundred, a thousand, or a million of pounds, need it be confined. The proper standard of reference and measurement in this case is indeed the aggregate value and amount of the offender’s property in all shapes. But what amount? Answer: Not the absolute amount, but the relative—relation had to the state of his pecuniary circumstances;—that is to say, to the sum of his needs or his demands for money, compared with the sum of his means of satisfying those demands.

12. Result upon the whole, a compound of public frugality and moral improvement,—the economy the efficient cause of the morality: a compound, but in proportion altogether incapable of being reached so much as by conjecture; the elements antagonizing in one way, co-operating in another. In each and every individual instance in which by the operation in question money is raised, the correspondent want of morality will have been proved: at the same time, by the example set by it—by the warning given by it, abstinence would be probabilized—abstinence to an extent unlimited and unlimitable: and free would be this compound from every the smallest particle of danger in every shape.

13. But under the assurance of the salutariness of both these results, and of their being one or other or both together actually produced, no great regret need be entertained at the thoughts of the impossibility that would oppose itself to any such operation as that of determining their mutual proportion—the proportion of each of them to the other.

14. Shut up for ever would be the affidavit and perjury manufactory, the seat of which is the Chancery Bench. Gone for ever, the occupation of the ex-Chancellor; blown up, the high pressure engine, of which he was the chief engineer: rescued, the child from the arms of the devouring hypocrite; restored to those in which it had been placed by the hands of Nature as its proper guardians: left in the possession of the right owners, the property of both; instead of being distributed between himself and his accomplices by the irresistible arch-depredator, the head of the law.

15. Given to public morality, melioration to a vast and indefinite amount: to public revenue, vast and indefinite increase;—the whole without addition made to human suffering. Deny, on definite grounds, who can, that these results will follow.

16. Personal and sinister interests to which the proposed system stands opposed:—Among high functionaries, all patronage owners; and among them, where is the individual who is not so? all dishonest men, in whose view it is to employ mendacity as an instrument of profitable maleficence: all lawyers who stand prepared to serve as instruments of maleficence to any dishonest suitors; that is to say, all lawyers by whom their aid to the here-proposed institution shall after consideration had of it have been withholden:—all rich men who are not more enamoured of justice, than it is natural for men in general, and in particular for rich men, to be.

17. As in this instance, so in every other, under Matchless Constitution, the more intensely and extensively beneficial a proposed arrangement is, the less the probability of its being adopted, and carried into effect in practice: under Matchless Constitution as it is, and so long as it continues to be as it is. But from the consideration of this state of things, is any valid reason suggested for abstaining from proposing what is good? Answer—Quite the contrary. For, the greater the quantity of good proposed, the greater the quantity that at each moment of time will be offering itself to the eyes, and calling forth the attention of the subject-many: the greater the quantity, the greater and stronger the quantity of attention bestowed: the greater the attention to a state of things so afflictive, the stronger the affliction: the stronger the affliction, the louder the outcry: the louder the outcry on the part of those same subject-many, the stronger the fears in the breast of their adversaries, the ruling few:—and these same subject-many, how little soever they may have to hope from the mercy of the at present irresistible arbiters of their fate, have everything to hope,—yes, and to be assured of,—from their uneasiness and their fears.