4 July 1812.

Evidence Introd

Introd

Ch. 23. Technically appropriate

'.1.

How great soever in theory that is upon this view of it the mischief may /will/ be, it will still not be a mischief in practice, if under a Jury the conclusion in the case where by the happening /intervention/ of an /this or that/ informative fact it is rendered erroneous could not be made to give way to a just and true one. But this is not the case: for in every instance it will be found /seen/, that as often as /to/ any such informative fact it happens to be realized /have place/, that the Jury should take cognizance of it is altogether natural, and no more than ought with confidence to be expected: whereas to a Judge, without inconsistency and [...?] this is not possible: the rule which in relation to this matter has been laid down and pursued being a rule in which, in the character of an informative fact /of the fact in question/ no account was taken, and of which accordingly by the realization of the informative fact in question, their falsity has been demonstrated.

Throughout the whole extent of the field, but for this mass of suruptitious and usurped law the Jury /[...?] judicatory/ could throughout the whole of the field been /have found itself/ at liberty at lest, to draw right conclusions: whereas by the [...?] which the Judges on such imperfect ground have [...?] down for one another predecessors for successors, they have bound one another, in as far as they are capable of being bound, to pronounce conclusions such as in many instances cannot but prove false.