★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
m Protected "JB/056/214/001": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)) |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>1827. <sic>Nov<hi rend="superscript">r.</hi></sic> 4<lb/>Law Amendment.</head> <p><note>Propositions.<lb/><sic>Ch.</sic> Procedure<lb/>§. next to <sic>Applicat<hi rend="superscript">n</hi></sic> & Suits<lb/>Evidence-elicitation<lb/>Existing system</note></p> <p><del><add>If the need of elicitation were apt<lb/>in an Equity case, so would it be in a<lb/><unclear>Common fees</unclear> case: if in a <gap/> <gap/><lb/>so in an Equity case</add></del></p> <p><note>6<lb/>Existing system<lb/>exclusion of litigant<lb/>witnesses</note></p> <p>Against evidence of litigant witnesses, the existing system<lb/>shuts a <sic>peremptry</sic> door. <foreign>Nemo debet esse testis in propria"<lb/>causa</foreign> says the oracle. <del>Thus <gap/></del> Against what witness is it<lb/>shut? against him who is most likely to know most about<lb/>the matter, and whose narrative <del>if</del> in so far as <unclear>fable</unclear> is<lb/>least likely to be deceptive: for by a <add>non</add> litigant witness may be<lb/>possessed an interest in the Suit an interest more valuable than<lb/>that of <del>th</del> either litigant and at the same time unknown and<lb/>undiscoverable: no eye so blind as not to be open to the <unclear>law</unclear><lb/>under which is delivered whatsoever is delivered by a party in<lb/>the suit.</p> <p>But that which against which the existing system shuts<lb/>the door it lets in at a wicket: and <add>for this</add> it has wickets more<lb/>than one.</p> <p><note>7<lb/>Admitted underhand<lb/>in equity</note></p> <p>In Equity it sets out with the exercise of <add>given to</add> a licence<lb/>given <add>granted</add> to the plaintiff to extract so it be by written interrogatories<lb/>the evidence in like manner written from the <add>proposed</add> defendant. <add><gap/></add> | <head>1827. <sic>Nov<hi rend="superscript">r.</hi></sic> 4<lb/>Law Amendment.</head> <p><note>Propositions.<lb/><sic>Ch.</sic> Procedure<lb/>§. next to <sic>Applicat<hi rend="superscript">n</hi></sic> & Suits<lb/>Evidence-elicitation<lb/>Existing system</note></p> <p><del><add>If the need of elicitation were apt<lb/>in an Equity case, so would it be in a<lb/><unclear>Common fees</unclear> case: if in a <gap/> <gap/><lb/>so in an Equity case</add></del></p> <p><note>6<lb/>Existing system<lb/>exclusion of litigant<lb/>witnesses</note></p> <p>Against evidence of litigant witnesses, the existing system<lb/>shuts a <sic>peremptry</sic> door. <foreign>Nemo debet esse testis in propria"<lb/>causa</foreign> says the oracle. <del>Thus <gap/></del> Against what witness is it<lb/>shut? against him who is most likely to know most about<lb/>the matter, and whose narrative <del>if</del> in so far as <unclear>fable</unclear> is<lb/>least likely to be deceptive: for by a <add>non</add> litigant witness may be<lb/>possessed an interest in the Suit an interest more valuable than<lb/>that of <del>th</del> either litigant and at the same time unknown and<lb/>undiscoverable: no eye so blind as not to be open to the <unclear>law</unclear><lb/>under which is delivered whatsoever is delivered by a party in<lb/>the suit.</p> <p>But that which against which the existing system shuts<lb/>the door it lets in at a wicket: and <add>for this</add> it has wickets more<lb/>than one.</p> <p><note>7<lb/>Admitted underhand<lb/>in equity</note></p> <p>In Equity it sets out with the exercise of <add>given to</add> a licence<lb/>given <add>granted</add> to the plaintiff to extract so it be by written interrogatories<lb/>the evidence in like manner written from the <add>proposed</add> defendant. <add><gap/></add> No objection<lb/>here: true, but, the adverse party being <sic>elicitator</sic> no information<lb/><del>but by from which</del> partially favourable to the examiners interest<lb/>will be called for. True again: but though not called for it<lb/>will not be the less surely delivered; <del><gap/></del> directly comes forth what<lb/>is called for:<del><gap/></del> in the form of a parenthesis, stuck into the<lb/>belly of a direct statement what is not called for: <del>what is<lb/><gap/> <gap/> <gap/> <gap/> <gap/></del> <add>a self-defining part directly and of course as sparingly as <del>possible</del></add><lb/>may be: the self serving in whatever quantity may best serve.</p> <p>The <add>proposed</add> Defendant <add>the examiner</add> speaks on his part of as what he then<lb/>speaks on paper there be any thing that is false. <add>In all that he says</add> Under no obligation<lb/>is the <add>plaintiff</add> <sic>elicitator</sic> <del>the</del> to speak a syllable of what is true<lb/>and in large proportion he is under compulsion <add>obligation</add> to say what<lb/>is false, what he knows to be false: every thing which <del>he</del> not<lb/>having to his need to know he must begin with saying that he<lb/>knows <add>has</add> it already and in no other form is he allowed to ask for<lb/>it.</p> <p>Here then <add>Then </add> we have testers we have testimony we have <foreign>testis<lb/>in propria causa</foreign> on both sides: <add>under obligation,</add> on the one side to abstain from falsity <add><sic>falshood</sic></add><lb/>on the other to revel in it to indulge in it</p> | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} | ||
1827. Novr. 4
Law Amendment.
Propositions.
Ch. Procedure
§. next to Applicatn & Suits
Evidence-elicitation
Existing system
If the need of elicitation were apt
in an Equity case, so would it be in a
Common fees case: if in a
so in an Equity case
6
Existing system
exclusion of litigant
witnesses
Against evidence of litigant witnesses, the existing system
shuts a peremptry door. Nemo debet esse testis in propria"
causa says the oracle. Thus Against what witness is it
shut? against him who is most likely to know most about
the matter, and whose narrative if in so far as fable is
least likely to be deceptive: for by a non litigant witness may be
possessed an interest in the Suit an interest more valuable than
that of th either litigant and at the same time unknown and
undiscoverable: no eye so blind as not to be open to the law
under which is delivered whatsoever is delivered by a party in
the suit.
But that which against which the existing system shuts
the door it lets in at a wicket: and for this it has wickets more
than one.
7
Admitted underhand
in equity
In Equity it sets out with the exercise of given to a licence
given granted to the plaintiff to extract so it be by written interrogatories
the evidence in like manner written from the proposed defendant. No objection
here: true, but, the adverse party being elicitator no information
but by from which partially favourable to the examiners interest
will be called for. True again: but though not called for it
will not be the less surely delivered; directly comes forth what
is called for: in the form of a parenthesis, stuck into the
belly of a direct statement what is not called for: what is
a self-defining part directly and of course as sparingly as possible
may be: the self serving in whatever quantity may best serve.
The proposed Defendant the examiner speaks on his part of as what he then
speaks on paper there be any thing that is false. In all that he says Under no obligation
is the plaintiff elicitator the to speak a syllable of what is true
and in large proportion he is under compulsion obligation to say what
is false, what he knows to be false: every thing which he not
having to his need to know he must begin with saying that he
knows has it already and in no other form is he allowed to ask for
it.
Here then Then we have testers we have testimony we have testis
in propria causa on both sides: under obligation, on the one side to abstain from falsity falshood
on the other to revel in it to indulge in it
|
Identifier: | JB/056/214/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 56. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1827-11-04 |
6-7 |
||
|
056 |
Law Amendment |
||
|
214 |
Law Amendment |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
Text sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
C2 / C1 |
||
|
BROCKLESBY & MORBEY 1827 |
|||
|
Edmund Henry Barker |
|||
|
1827 |
|||
|
18270 |
|||
