Status: Needs Review

(1) 5

In other words we have an individual
who is part of a body corporate and
(2) the rest of mankind. This is precisely that
which is in Australia and which I have
drawn attention to and illustrated by the case
of Lamby and the kin of Barney.

In this case the injury done to the body corporate
[? ? ?] through its member extended to the large body
corporate of the class of which the "representatives" was
['an a unit' crossed out] an unit. ['This crime having been' crossed out]
['committed by a member of the Body Corporate' crossed out]

The distinction must be drawn between cases
when the aggressor and the victim are
of the same body corporate and when
they are members of different bodie corporat.
Lamby and Barney were members of the
bodie which ['together formed' crossed out] were units
of a larger aggregate and in this case
vengeance was satisfied by the aggressor
going through the lawful [ordeal?]. Had however
Lamby been a member of a body corporate
entirely [strange?], vengeance would not
have been satisfied yet by his blood
or failing him of any other member of the
corporate body. ['Such a case' crossed out] Eyre
['evidently' crossed out] refers to a ['the wellknown' crossed out]
well known Australian doctrine the full
[meaning?] of which it seems has not been
perused. Sir John Lubbuk in conclusion
seems to me to imply the individual
[?] of all members of the
savage society ['and in to' crossed out]

Notes and Questions

Nobody has written a note for this page yet

Please sign in to write a note for this page