8 Dec r 1803

Evidence

Exclusion

2 Notoriety

The particular article /division/ of law which is the subject of the personal inquiry is a set of rules of evidence - a branch of adjective law applying to the whole system of substantive law and taking the whole together weakening the operative force of it. An indisputable matter of fact is - that the existence of this debilitative appendage of /to/ the whole mass of substantive law is in its details and in great measure incapable of being made known compleatly unknown, to the great body of the people. The question is what is the influence of this non-notoriety upon the efficacy of these rules of exclusion, in respect of the debilitation notion /influence/ which it is the nature of them to exercise upon the aggregate mass of the substantive branch of the law? and thence how far is it /is the state of things produced by it/ a desirable, how far an undesirable result?

In the aggregate mass of substantive law, the good, in every country it has already been observed) infinitely outweighs the bad. In every case the effect of which is to introduce a general debility /destroy the efficacy or any part of the efficacy/ of this salutary and necessary system into all its parts, good and bad without distinction, the action /operation/ can not therefore but be pernicious upon the whole. A rule of law by which a lot of evidence - the evidence of every individual of this or that description, is excluded as often as it becomes necessary for the giving effect to this or that article of substantive law is pro tanto destructive of the efficacy of such article of substantive law, and so of every such article whatsoever. Upon the whole A rule of law of this description can not therefore but be pernicious, upon the whole. /and that in a very high degree/.