JB/042/148/001

Completed

Ch. 13. 1827. Novr. 20 copied. 1826. Augt 22? Constitutional Code Ch. XII Judiciary Collectively
S.9. Elementary functions

1.
Objection-imperative
functions stated as necessarily
common to
all Judges- why more
necessary than in Danish
Conciliatory
Courts?

2.
Answer By proposed
system, all the good
done by Conciliatory
Courts will be done,
and a great deal more
which they could not
do.

3.
In Conciliatory
Courts, Evidence in
many cases must
have been deficient
or partial.

4.
Of compulsory evidence
no means of procurement.

5.
Means of securing ge
nuineness and veracity,
none.

6.
The Judicatory many
seated, consequent
inconvenience.

7.
So waste of time to
Judges all but one

8.
True it is, that the
good done was done
without expence to the
public.

---page break---

9.
No reason why the
saving made there
should not be made
under the here proposed
system.

10.
Of the economy resulting
from proposed
systems, strong presumptive
evidence

11. Though remuneration
given, it is cut down
to the smallest portion
each person will be
content to take.

12. Objections to small
ness of remuneration
the prodigious mass
of scientific informations
required on
the part of the Judge.

13.
Under proposed Penal
and Procedure Code,
the requisite scientific
information minimized.

14.
Government Advocate's
functions-
1. In an imediate
Judicatory-
2. in an Appellate
Judicatory.

15.
Elementary Advocate's
functions
1. In an imediate
Judicatory-
2. in an Appellate
Judicatory.

Identifier: \| JB/042/148/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 42.
Date_1	1826-08-22	Marginal Summary Numbering	1-15
Box	042	Main Headings	constitutional code
Folio number	148	Info in main headings field	constitutional code
Image	001	Titles
Category	marginal summary sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering
Penner	john flowerdew colls	Watermarks
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	13071
Box Contents