058-389.xml

Title: [19 June 1805 Evidence Note]

Description: 19 June 1805

Evidence

Note

Introd

Ch. Procedure Technical

''3. Mendacity encouragement

limited to parties

3 (a) continued

Extracts from [...?] de Manléon continued

And in the occasion of another cause (that of Simonote[?] against Le Roir) he concludes (1. 124.) "c'est vie [...?], que je suis combien dans ces sortes de causes, les parties sont se plaindre de ce pas les plaider illusionnes - Dû le [...?] Dumont[?] [...?], sans etude et sans art, apporter lui même avoir pieds ses douleurs melées de confiance et de crainte, s'il fairoit relentir ces [...?] ce cri si vrai de la nature qui penetre qui remue tens les crain; a ses larmes [...?] pentétre aux votres vous [...?] toute la justice toute la verité de sa cause. Et si le plus sage des rois reconnut a la [...?] qu'eut une femme qu'on ne lui enlevat sons fils, qu'elle en etoit la [...?], et la crainte qu'il vous feroit voir aujourd'hui qu'on ne lui donner les filles qui le reclamant vous verrier tous qu'il n'est point la veritable [...?]

Nor that on this or any other occasion he confesses what could scarcely be a secret either to him or to any other practicer in a French Court not to speak of other Courts) of justice, that the remedy against deception on the part of the Judge consists not merely in the eloquence of the parties in the character of Advocates in their own course, but much more in their inevitable veracity in the character of witnesses, when confronted with each other, and examined as to all the natural points in the cause, at the outset of it, face to face, in the presence of the Judge: as was the actual practice all the while in the Consular Courts of which there were many at that time in France

In the same Volume p.300 a list is given of the causes of vexation and delay to which a poor widow had been subjected for a space of two years, all of them factitious, all of them having mendacity, licenced, [...?] and unrepressible mendacity for their source: "[...?] conflits de jurisdiction deplacies, des resistances ouvertes aux ordres de la Cour, des abus d'[...?] pour arreter les assignations (notices to appear) des conventions tenuaires[?] ([...?]) des arrêts hardement surpris (by mendacious statements without oath examination or fear of punishment as in special pleading) sur requete au milieu d'une instance liée et contradictoire; (as if by Injunction Bill in Equity after the parties were at [...?] at Common Law) - ce n'est qu'une partie des maux[?] qu'elle avait a souffrir." This however was but a flea-bite: in that instance, the course of vexation had not at that time lasted above two years.

074_383.xml

Title: [10 April 1804 Evidence Forthcomingness]

Description: 10 April 1804

Evidence

Forthcomingness

§ 6 Appearance - General

Subsequent Appear

French Law

§. 6. Continuation - French Law.

In French law, it should seem, after the recent improvements /legislative labours/ of so many years, this innovation is yet to make. Summoned by the defendant in a criminal cause, or at any rate a capital one, a witness is at perfect liberty. Friendly to the summoner he obeys the summons: adverse, or indifferent, he takes no notice of it. The case in which this was pronounced to be law, and by the first /highest/ person /authority/ in the law, was the case of treason committed against the person of the first Magistrate. +

It means /declares/ just the contrary. I neither dare to appear, nor would appear if I durst. There is one above me /Above me sits a potentate/ whose wish it is to see the defendant convicted, guilty or not guilty. By hope and fear together the wish of that [...?] reigns in my heart paramount to [...?]. Were I to appear, and to be examined, I must save the defendant at the expense of my interest, or destroy him at the expense of my character. Then plea /speech/ may be true or false: but such is the tenor /language/ of it, as plain as it is in the power of silence to speak, by the interpretation of circumstances /with circumstances to interpret it/.

Dans le procès criminal contre leur qui avaient tenté d'assasséner Bonaparte, Demerville l'un des accusès se plaignait de l'absence du Consul Carabarerès[?] qu'il avait démandé comme témoin à dechaigé - Je demande, dit-il, que le tribunal lui enjoint/enjoigne[?] de compaioître - Le tribunal n'en a pas le droit, répond le President. La comparation des témoins à décharge est volontaire pour eux. Ne point comparoître, c'est repondre, c'est dire qu'ils n'ont n'en à déclarer en faveur de l'accusé - Paris[?]-par delties[?] n.220 Fevrier ann. 1800.

Ce principe est faux. Le témoin sommè par l'accusé ne doit point avoir le droit de se refuser: il ne peut point savoir davance sur quoi l'accusé peut s'appelles en témpoignage - ce peut être sur un fait essentiel que lui seul peut prouver - accorder ce droit aux témoins à decharge, ce seroit mettre un accusé dans le cas de ne pouvoir faire aucune de ses preuves justificatives - c'est donner libre carriere à l'homme puissant contre tout le monde - c'est exposer les témoins à dècharge qui compaivissent, au lieu que leur propre sûreté demande qu'ils soient sous la constrainte de la loi et sous celle du serment.

Le refus de compaioître ne signifie point qu'on n'a n'en à declarer en faveur de l'accusé - il signifie qu'on craint de se compromettre en parlant pour un homme accussé par une partie redoutable - qu'on est indolent qu'on n'aime pas l'accusé - qu'on ne se soncie pas de lui -

Le témoin sommé peut-il decider davance sur quel point de fait l'accusé a besoin de son témoignage -

Ce principe me paroit si horrible que je crains de ne pas comprendre le vrai sens du President de ce tribunal cependant, je ne puis en trouver aucun autre. Témoin à decharge, e'est un témoin que l'accusè rèclame en sa faveur. Les laisser libres de paroître ou de ne pas comparaître, c'est les laisser libres de refuser le premire service qu'on doit à un citoyen et[?] à un malheureux.

(Translation)

In the criminal process against those who have attempted to assassinate Bonaparte, Demerville one of the accused complained of the absence of the Consul Carabarerès[?] whom he asked to be [a] witness for the defence. - I ask, he says, that the tribunal call upon him to appear - The tribunal is not entitled to replied the President. The appearance of witnesses of the defence is voluntary for them. Not to appear at all, is to reply, is to say that they do not declare (themselves) in favour of the accused - Paris[?]-by [...?] n.220 February yr.1808.

This principle is false. The witnes summoned by the accused does not at all have the right to refuse: he could not at all know in advance on what the accused would be called upon to give evidence - this perhaps on an essential fact that he alone could prove to accord the right to the witness of the defence, would be to put an accussed in the place to not be able to do anything with his relevant evidence - it is to give a free hand to the powerful man against the whole world - it is to expose the witnesses of the defence who testify, wheras their own security demands that they should be under the constraint of the law and under that of oath.

The refusal to testify does not at all signify that one does not declare oneself in favour of the accused - it signifies that one fears to compromise oneself by talking for an accused man by a redoubtable party - that one is indolent - that one does not like the accused - that one does not concern oneself about him -

Should the summoned witness decide in advance on whichpoint of fact the accused has need of his testimony -

This principle appears to me so horrible that I fear not to have understood the true sense of the President or this tribunal however, I can not think of any other. Witness of the defence, it is a witness that the accused calls for in his favour. To let them free to appear or not to testify, its to let them free to refuse the first duty that one owes to a citizen and [?] to an unfortunate.

148-064.xml

Title: [1821 Oct. 19 ┴ G §.7 To Toreno]

Description: 1821 Oct. 19 ┴ G §.7

To Toreno

Letter VI

§.7 Atonement proposed

While this pen of mine is moving, in come a cluster of documents shewing the progress made of Codification shewing the progress made in the quondam emulated[?] Republic now stiled the Canton of Geneva. They are three in number namely 1. a Code of procedure bearing date in 1819 and actually in force pp. | | /1 Loi sur le Procedure Civil par le Canton de Geneve Deinté[?] par le Conseil Representatif et Souverain le 29 Septembre 1819 pages 188/: 2. A work of M r Bellot’s entituled exposé des Motifs de la Loi sur la Procedure Civile pour le Canton de Geneve pages 236: 3. Projet de Code Penal par la Republique et Canton de Geneve Mai 1821 pages 87: 4. Avertissement par M. Etienne Dumont Membre de la Commission pour la reduction du Code pages x.

As to giving any account of them, or any of them, so much as setting eyes on them or any of them, it is what I dare not trust myself: Sir, at any rate till this my correspondence with you is closed. The most accredited Codes of cultivated Europe so often from the wisdom of which Gentlemen have not disdained to enrich theirs have not I will venture to /would not scruple to/ affirm had, any of them a tenth part of the consideration declared upon that /the/ proposed Code just mentioned[?]. Great /Not small/ will be my surprise, if in my eyes /judgment/ I do not find it in a high degree conducive to the greatest happiness of the greatest number than the most accredited whichever it may be of all those their most acredited Codes. But in saying that you will not easily conceive how little it appears to me that I have been saying in favour of it. On that occasion these works of mine that are in French were {I am informed} made use of. Application was made to me to me to furnish a proposed Penal Code. I had even sat down to the task, and made some progress: but the circumstances of the occasion and the time were not favourable to the accomplishment. A love is not an empire: 40,000 are not so many as 16,000,000: Geneva was /is/ not so near to me as London. The sensation of a bridle in the mouth was not found more agreable (I understand) at Geneva than at Madrid. The proposal of a Rationale had been rejected. {Masters /Employers/ to whom the obligation of giving reason for the} use made of their power