★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
<head>1825. March 20.<lb/>Procedure Code.</head> <p><note>P II<lb/><sic>Ch</sic> IV Intermediate proceeding<lb/>§. testimony, how procurable</note></p> <!-- this page is organised in two columns --> <p>1.<lb/>In every such Testimony-requiring<lb/>Mandate<lb/>will moreover<lb/>be inserted the warnings<lb/>following.<lb/>1. Warning of the <sic>burthensome</sic><lb/>consequence<lb/>of non compliance<lb/>2. Warning of the <sic>burthensome</sic><lb/>consequence<lb/>of falsity in several<lb/>shapes.</p> <p>2.<lb/>So where Defendant<lb/>has applicable property.</p> <p>3.<lb/>Warning of suspicion<lb/>of delinquency.</p> <p>4.<lb/>But to pursuer, evil<lb/>from non attendance<lb/>of witness may be the<lb/>same as in the opposite<lb/>case.</p> <p>5.<lb/>In general, more<lb/>convenient to accept<lb/>of epistolary response<lb/>than to send for oral<lb/>examination to distant<lb/>judicatory.</p> <p>6.<lb/>Epistolary testimony<lb/>eventually confronted<lb/>with oral.</p> <p>7.<lb/>On reiterated enquiry,<lb/><sic>accersition</sic> of witness<lb/>on suspicion<lb/>of mendacity.</p> <p.8.<lb/>So even on original enquiry.</p> <p>9.<lb/>Cases for <sic>preferableness</sic><lb/>of epistolary over<lb/>oral Testimony<lb/>1. Fact solitary.<lb/>2. Fact simple.</p> | |||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{In_Progress}} | ||
1825. March 20.
Procedure Code.
P II
Ch IV Intermediate proceeding
§. testimony, how procurable
1.
In every such Testimony-requiring
Mandate
will moreover
be inserted the warnings
following.
1. Warning of the burthensome
consequence
of non compliance
2. Warning of the burthensome
consequence
of falsity in several
shapes.
2.
So where Defendant
has applicable property.
3.
Warning of suspicion
of delinquency.
4.
But to pursuer, evil
from non attendance
of witness may be the
same as in the opposite
case.
5.
In general, more
convenient to accept
of epistolary response
than to send for oral
examination to distant
judicatory.
6.
Epistolary testimony
eventually confronted
with oral.
7.
On reiterated enquiry,
accersition of witness
on suspicion
of mendacity.
<p.8.
So even on original enquiry.
9.
Cases for preferableness
of epistolary over
oral Testimony
1. Fact solitary.
2. Fact simple.
|
Identifier: | JB/052/090/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 52. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1825-03-20 |
1-16 |
||
|
052 |
procedure code |
||
|
090 |
procedure code |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
marginal summary sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
|||
|
john flowerdew colls |
j whatman turkey mill 1824 |
||
|
jonathan blenman |
|||
|
1824 |
|||
|
16763 |
|||
