JB/057/216/001

Click Here To Edit

1825. March 20
Procedure Code

12
Ch. IX
(12 §. 10 Testimony how procurable
11 Exception excepted
11 Epistolary better than
oral elicitation

(1)
Art. The enquiry in question being the original enquiry

5
In general more
convenient to accept
of epistolary response
than to send for oral
examination to distant
judicatory

Art. In general Generally speaking exceptions excepted it will
be more better convenient to the ends of justice, to accept of set the
hands of the proposed witness his epistolary response, than to send remitt
him for oral examination to his own distant judicatory.
Follow the reasons as derives from the undermentioned
arrangements.

[Reason The occasion in question is that on
which the enquiry is [in contradistinction to the reiterated
recapitulation a Quasi-Jury enquiry,] the original one]

6
Epistolary testimony
eventually confronted
with oral

(3)
Art. For the better more effectually securing
at the hand of the proposed witness, the compleatness as well as
correctness of his testimony, his oral epistolary testimony as elicited
in the oral epistolary mode, will may eventually be confronted with his
testimony subsequently elicited in the oral mode: and
of this check, warning will as per Art. be given to him in the testimony-requiring
Mandate.

7
In reiterated enquiry
accusation of witness on
suspicion of mendacity

Art. On the Reiterated Enquiry, in case
of and the if in case of suspicion of mendacity, uncertainty
of sincerity of assertion, the Judge will not scruple
to accuse or even to cause adduce the witness from
his own habitation, howsoever distant.

8
So even on original
enquiry

Art. Not even on the original enquiry,
if by insufficient answer it appears to him that the
purpose of the witness is by insufficient answers to produce factitious delay

2. For some special
reason assigned, the
Judge sees reason to
send the parties on to
the distant Judicatory:
whether for the purpose
of the entire suit, or
for only for the some particular purpose or purposes, such as these same examinations.

(2)
Art. Exceptions are the following

1. The Rather than that the epistolary should be the mode employed,
the pursuer party by whom the testimony is required, prefers
the taking the examination at the Defendants Judicatory, even though
by the Defendants requiring his the Pursuers confessional testimony,
he should find himself under the obligation of migrating to
and paying attendance at that same more or less distant judicatory.

Identifier: | JB/057/216/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 57.
Date_1	1825-03-20	Marginal Summary Numbering	5-8
Box	057	Main Headings	procedure code
Folio number	216	Info in main headings field	procedure code
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d12 / e12
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	j whatman turkey mill 1824
Marginals		Paper Producer	admiral pavel chichagov
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year	1824
Notes public		ID Number	18546
Box Contents