JB/034/048/001

Click Here To Edit

1823. Septr. 4.

Constitutional Code.

50.
3. Third service to ends
of justice, securing to
evidence the most apt
shape, where obtainable.
viz. where it passes in
presence of the auditory
from the lips of a relating
witness to the ear
of the Judge by whom, decision
grounded on it
is pronounced: subject
to be made correct and
compleat by interrogation;
and not obtained
through the vitiating
medium of professional
and official, interested
in vitiating it.

51.
No less capable of being
given to evidence
in this most apt shape
in Judicatories without
Jury, than in Judicatories with Jury, nor on the occasions
when the Jury is
not, than on do. where
it is called in.

52.
Where the faculty of
giving this shape to it
is within reach, by
no Judge, who wishes
to come at the truth,
is it ever received in
any other. Witness –
1. Parliamentary enquiries
for legislative purposes.
2. Investigatorial inquiries
as to crimes deemed
important enough.
3. Domestic procedure
as to Children's or Servant's
offences.

---page break---

53.
But of none of those
by whom the course of
procedure has any
where been established,
has it been the wish
that the truth be come
at. To maximize professional
and official
profit has been their
wish, thence, to maximize
falshood that
further proceedings might
be necessitated.

54.
Cause why this shape
of evidence became almost
exclusively connected
with Jury-admitting
procedure.
Even antecedently to it's
establishment, viz. in
Saxon times, the Judicatory
was popular: members
of it, all the freemen
of the district: president
alone (Sheriff or Bailiff)
nominee of Monarch
or Sub-Monarch, Baron.

55.
When this section of
the Judicatory succeeded
to the , still
there being no money
to pay scribes, there were
no scribes.

56.
As the money came in,
Scribes, leagued in sinister
interest with the
Judges, came in Under
the name of pleadings,
compounds of absurdity &
wilful falshood which,
as such, were not admitted
as evidence
written by Scribes in the
name of the parties were exacted,
the parties with their
evidence being for this purpose
excluded.

---page break---

57.
Why excluded? Because
in most cases, had they
been admitted, there
would have been nothing
to do fro these
Scribes, and the business
would have been
settled at a single sitting.

58.
Hence the rule. Into
the presence of the
Judge, by whom the fate
of the suit is to be determined,
never let
the parties in presence
of each other, and the
public be admitted.
Note, as to settling compensation
to Judge for
his service, separate
interview in private
was convenient enough.

59.
Conclusion.
1. Receiving evidence
in it's best shape was
actually attached to
procedure with Jury.
2. In every case, it
may with equal benefit
be employed
in procedure without
Jury.

60.
Of the Quasi Jury System,
the framer has
nothing to get by absurdity
and falshood in
the shape of written
pleadings: thence, no
such ingredient is
here admitted.

Identifier: | JB/034/048/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 34.
Date_1	1823-09-04	Marginal Summary Numbering	50-60
Box	034	Main Headings	constitutional code
Folio number	048	Info in main headings field	constitutional code
Image	001	Titles
Category	marginal summary sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	d5
Penner	john flowerdew colls	Watermarks
Marginals		Paper Producer
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	10322
Box Contents