[...?] 1803

Evidence

Circums. [...?] [...?]

Ch. Divine.

Circumstantial evidence in [...?] temporis, precedential or subsequential.

Circumstantial evidence grounded on the supposition of a Theocracy or particular providence.

In times now [...?], different contrivances were imagined and what is more employed for calling in /obtaining the services of/ God Almighty in the character of a witness. The Evidence thus sought for, belongs to the head of scientific evidence: and admitting it were to be had, can not be denied /must evidently be admitted/ to be the best evidence.

Supposing it obtained, the shape in which it was expected to be obtained belongs to the head of circumstantial evidence. It was not direct. God Almighty /The witness/ was not expected to appear in court: his testimony was to be made out in the way of inference, from /it consisted[?] of/ the real evidence afforded by his actions, by his deportment: by the part he took in relation to the business: it was not expected to contain any specifications in respect of time or place: it was analogous in this respect to generally confessional evidence: it was a sort of generally attestative[?] evidence - attestative in general terms.

For putting the question to God Almighty /this species of witness/ various modes of interrogation have been in use in various nations as also in the same nation, on different occasions. The most celebrated are 1. Wager of Battel 2. Ordeal &c Corsned &c. 3 Lot.

Shew the train of ratiocination in the case of Wager of Battel, and the other cases. Then go on to say.

Of these several modes of interrogation by far the most unexceptionable was that of lot: supposing it to be conducted without fraud. NO blood shed, no murder as in case of wager of battel. No poisoning /murder by poisons or other instruments/ under the veil of law and religion, as in case of the corsned or other ordeal, where it was predetermined that the evidence of the almighty /omniscient/ witness should be on the criminative side: /put into the criminative scale of this ballance:/ no imposture and corrupt breach of judicial official trust as in the case where it was predetermined that the evidence /testimony/ of the same unexceptionably veracious and decisive witness /evidence/ should be on the exculpative side.

The same mode of decision would even now be an improvement and that a very considerable one, as /if/ substituted to decisions grounded on argumentation, in all questions of competency - of exclusion on the ground of security against deception: for in every other instance the testimony would upon this plan be admitted in one /in every other/ instance out of two, and the suitor would have an even chance for justice, the check to /upon/ delinquency would be much stronger - the security in respect of /life/ person, property, expectation and condition in life would be much stronger than at present.

The witness, being a percipient witness an eye witness, would, had he been so minded, have given his evidence in individualizing terms but the terms actually employed by him were not of that sort they were general terms, such as are employed in the sort of had[?] above characterized by the appellation of generally [...?] evidence.

Note

The authority exercised by man over his maker is /has been/ unbounded. Jealousy, capricious haughty malevolent without provocation, He creates him after his own image: by promissory oaths o all kinds he has made him act in the character of an [...?] Executioner adopt and execute upon delinquents all human laws. By supernatural modes of trial, or rather of attestation, he makes /forces/ him to give decisive evidence in all cases.