1822 Decr. 13

Tripoli - Securities against Misrule

7o

Preliminary Explanations

?.2. Remedy Publicity

Publ. Opin. Tribunal

?.3 Functions compared

Follow, under the above several heads, a few observations, having for their object the bringing to view the principal points of agreement and difference beween the one sort of judicatory and the other.

1. Receiving accusations. Note that, in the case of a claim conception not being quite so simple, it may on the present occasion /for the purpose of the present exemplification/ be put aside. In the Newspaper in question an allegation is made of misconduct /misdoing/ in a certain shape as having had place on the part of a certain functionary or set of functionaries: the accuser whether the Editor himself or a correspondent makes to this purpose no difference. Here may be seen an instrument of accusation received, and here may be seen an exemplification of it. /the function of receiving accusations stands exemplified./

2. Receiving defences. for /Of/ the exemplification given /made/ of the exercise of this function indication will be given /made/ presently.

3. On this same occasion a correspondent mentions /makes mention/ perhaps /of/ this or that particular as having fallen within his own knowledge: for the security of Editor and Printer the name though not signed, having or not having been privately communicated. Here the function of reception of this piece[?] of evidence and, at the same time, that of the impression and /of it, and that of the/ diffusion of it stand exemplified.

At the same time whether directly by means of appropriate and direct questions, or at any rate indirectly and virtually, by means of positive /affirmative/ /apposite/ allegations as above, the party accused is called upon either to confess the /act/ thus indicated act with the /its/ inculpative circumstances, and at the same time thus directly or virtually to confess the impropriety /culpability/ of it, or to deny the act or some essential inculpative circumstance or circumstances belonging to it, or admitting what is above to argue in justification of the act.

The next day or the next but one suppose, the party thus called, argues suppose in justification of the act; but at the same time either directly avows the having performed /done/ it or by his silence or the turn given to his argument virtually admitts it. Here the function of compelling evidence stands exemplified.