JB/055/169/001: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts

JB/055/169/001: Difference between revisions

Kdownunder (talk | contribs)
m Protected "JB/055/169/001": ready for review ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))
Kdownunder (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''[{{fullurl:JB/055/169/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
'''[{{fullurl:JB/055/169/001|action=edit}} Click Here To Edit]'''
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
 
<p>1825 <del>May</del> June 29<lb/>
''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>Procedure Code</head><note>Ch. Evidence<lb/>
 
&sect;. Interrog. Epist<hi rend="superscript">y.</hi>  how</note></p>
 
<p><!-- pencil -->Art. 5.  In most cases individually considered<lb/>
 
but a small portion of the record of any will <add>perhaps</add> be found<lb/>
of a nature to contribute in any way to invest the<lb/>
testimony with the <del>desire</del> qualities desirable in it, as<lb/>
above.  But forasmuch as on <del>any</del> the occasion of an<lb/>
all-embracing regulation on this subject it is not possible<lb/>
to foresee <del>how</del> in what proportion the number in<lb/>
question may <del>be</del> on the <del>several</del> several individual occasions<lb/>
conducive to the desirable purposes, the courses thus <del>taken</del><lb/>
taken, to wit the prescribing <add>in the first instance</add> the whole <del>by the</del> to be <unclear>sent</unclear>,<lb/>
and then <del><gap/> employing</del> <add>giving to</add> the cases in which it shall not<lb/>
be sent the form of exceptions to the general rule, seemed<lb/>
the course best adapted to the purpose.</p>
<p>The idea of discussing with the Judge the propriety<lb/>
and sufficiency of the interrogatories may be apt to startle<lb/>
those to whom no other practice than that of <unclear>concerting</unclear> them<lb/>
between Client and Attorney or settling them by the Attorney<lb/>
and Advocate without the cognizance of the Client is known<lb/>
by experience.  But what is here proposed is nothing more<lb/>
than the doing as far as the nature of the case allows on the<lb/>
occasion of this intercourse between persons mutually distant<lb/>
what it does on the occasion of that intercourse which<lb/>
for the same purpose is carried on between persons mutually<lb/>
present.  The representative of the party puts questions<lb/>
indeed of his own motion to the extraneous witness but <del><gap/> is</del><lb/>
only in so far as allowed and exacted by the authority of<lb/>
the Judge, are any answers given to them.  In case of alledged<lb/>
insufficiency, the answer must in a charge to that effect, come<lb/>
before the Judge:  an so <add>again</add> as often as necessary:  and less <add>of his</add> time than<lb/>
may be necessary for repairing the defect, may <del><gap/></del> naturally be sufficient for obviating and preventing it.</p>
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Untranscribed}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Ready_For_Review}}

Revision as of 04:40, 17 October 2024

Click Here To Edit

1825 May June 29
Procedure CodeCh. Evidence
§. Interrog. Episty. how

Art. 5. In most cases individually considered
but a small portion of the record of any will perhaps be found
of a nature to contribute in any way to invest the
testimony with the desire qualities desirable in it, as
above. But forasmuch as on any the occasion of an
all-embracing regulation on this subject it is not possible
to foresee how in what proportion the number in
question may be on the several several individual occasions
conducive to the desirable purposes, the courses thus taken
taken, to wit the prescribing in the first instance the whole by the to be sent,
and then employing giving to the cases in which it shall not
be sent the form of exceptions to the general rule, seemed
the course best adapted to the purpose.

The idea of discussing with the Judge the propriety
and sufficiency of the interrogatories may be apt to startle
those to whom no other practice than that of concerting them
between Client and Attorney or settling them by the Attorney
and Advocate without the cognizance of the Client is known
by experience. But what is here proposed is nothing more
than the doing as far as the nature of the case allows on the
occasion of this intercourse between persons mutually distant
what it does on the occasion of that intercourse which
for the same purpose is carried on between persons mutually
present. The representative of the party puts questions
indeed of his own motion to the extraneous witness but is
only in so far as allowed and exacted by the authority of
the Judge, are any answers given to them. In case of alledged
insufficiency, the answer must in a charge to that effect, come
before the Judge: an so again as often as necessary: and less of his time than
may be necessary for repairing the defect, may naturally be sufficient for obviating and preventing it.


Identifier: | JB/055/169/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 55.

Date_1

1825-06-29

Marginal Summary Numbering

Box

055

Main Headings

Constitutional Code; Procedure Code

Folio number

169

Info in main headings field

Procedure Code

Image

001

Titles

Category

Text sheet

Number of Pages

1

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

E2

Penner

Watermarks

Marginals

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

17890

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in