JB_045_486.xml

Title: [3 June 1803 Evidence Best]

Description: 3 June 1803

Evidence

Best

2. Scrutinised with unscrutinised

1. Comparison the first: - Scrutinized with unscrutinized; and more perfectly with less perfectly scrutinized.

The scrutative operation /catalogue of scrutative arrangements/ has already been brought to view:- they are comprized in the mode of proceeding to be /to be/ pursued /observed/ in the examination of witnesses: 1. Questions in a series, successive not simultaneous: that maintain, mendacious invention may have the less light to work by: 2. Answers, extemporaneous, and thence unpremeditated and uninstructed: 3. Questions not immutably-pre-arranged, but each succeeding question grounded in and thence guided by the answer to the question last preceding 4. Depositions of each preceding, kept /[...?] concealed from each succeeding deponent: that memory, and not mendacious instruction any more than mendacious invention may be thee guide. 5. Cross-examination: i:e: the testimony that has been extracted by questions put by the party at whose instance the witness is produced /made to come forward/, checked and compleated by questions propounded on the other side. 6. Confrontation, where /upon occasion, as/ necessary between deponent and deponent for example non-litigious witness and defendant, that personal identity may be the more satisfactorily established. 7. the - examination of a deponent upon occasion, that other depositions given on a preceding examination may be corrected by the lights furnished collected as well from the depositions of precedently examined deponents were communicated to him as from his own maturer recollections. 8. Publication, certain or more or less probable, and consequently expectation entertained by each deponent of the publicity of his deposition, - and thence an encreased chance for the ultimate detection of any errors on on his part, designed or undesigned.

If the above arrangements, all /each/of them without exception have their use, in how high a degree must a lot or a body of evidence /of [...?] which/ that for the deposition and completion of it has had the benefit of their united influence be superior to one which has not had the benefit of any part of that influence? And again /But moreover/ if there be not one of them that in the state of things to which it applies has not its use, it will follow that by any one of them that can be added the superiority the security for the correctness and veracity of the evidence will be encreased; by every one omitted, it will be decreased.

059-266.xml

Title: [6 July 1804 Procedure & Evidence]

Description: 6 July 1804

Procedure & Evidence

Evils causes

4th order

'.2 Fallaciousness

2. Evil the cause of which is sought - -- 2 evil of the 3rd order

Fallaciousness in this or that article /lot/ of evidence.

I. Personal evidence and written evidence

1. Natural causes

1. Influence of the several causes of incorrectness in testimony: which see.

2. Influence of the several causes of mendacity and bias in testimony: which see.

3. Insufficiency of the several causes of veracity: which see.

II. Factitious causes negative.

1. Omission on the part of the legislator to require pre-appointed and thence trustworthy evidence in cases that admitt of such pre-appointment: i.e. of a ----- of witnesses /evidence/ to ---- for the proof of a fact before it has taken place. See

2. Omission on the part of the legislator to make the requisite arrangements for the preserving by registration such evidence as requires to be preserved.

3. Omission on the part of the legislator to ---- for all cases alike (particular cases /specified cases/ excepted, where the evil of vexation and expence would preponderate) that mode of extracting /extraction/ the evidence which is best calculated for rendering it trustworthy: such alone excepted in which the advantage in point of trustworthiness would not pay for the evil in the shape of delay, vexation & expence.

III. Factitious causes positive

3. Positive encouragement given to mendacity by the legislator and under his authority by the judge, in various ways.

Examples

1. Facts known to be false alleged by the judge, under the name of fictions for the grounds and reasons of his decision.

2. Parties /A party/ compelled to exhibit facts notoriously false (also under the name of fiction) on pain of losing his cause.

3. A party allowed to advantage himself in the course of procedure in various ways, by false allegations, without being punished or prosecuted[?] in any way for the mendacity.  Re---- onwards.

058-249.xml

Title: [26 Jan y 1805 Evidence Securities]

Description: 26 Jan y 1805

Evidence

Securities

Ch. Procedure Natural

'' Mutual Declarations

3. In regard to the above several sources of evidence personal, real and written he will have it in his power to declare what he knows or believes of the places in which they respectively exist - and where any difficulty presents itself as to the ensuring them to be forthcoming for the purposes of justice, what he knows or believes concerning the nature of it and the means that offer themselves for the removal of it.

4. In regard to all these several facts of the truth of which he is persuaded by evidence other than that of his own personal presumptions, he will have it in his power to declare on in the face of the adversary as well as the Judge, the existence of such persuasion

5. In regard to the applicability /appropriate[ness?]/ of the law relied upon by him as above, he will have it in his power to declare the like persuasion.

6. Each declaration will according to the rules above laid down, be to be made, under the same security for its purity as well from [...?] as from mendacity, as in the case of those /such/ facts,if any, in respect of which his persuasion has his own personal presumption - the evidence of his own senses for the ground of it.