★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
<p>54. or 24. <lb/>Examination of either<lb/> party under this check,<lb/> he will not suffer till<lb/> the suit is lodged in hand,<lb/> in maximizing operations<lb/> & instruments by nullities.<lb/></p><p>55. or 25.<lb/> Brought thus in the bud<lb/> before an unfeed Judge,<lb/> the suit might have been<lb/> <sic>nipt</sic>: and reconciliation, <lb/>if the case admitted, <lb/>made.<lb/></p><p>56. or 26. <lb/>In Denmark, where Conciliation<lb/> Courts originated, <lb/>the object was to<lb/> keep suits, as many as <lb/>possible, out of hands<lb/> interested in maximiz..<hi rend="superscript">g</hi><lb/> expence and thence<lb/> vexation: in a considerable<lb/> proportion this<lb/> was effected.<lb/></p><p>47. or 27. <lb/>For the same instrum..<hi rend="superscript">t</hi><lb/> (summons to appear) <lb/>under it's tow names —<lb/> (<hi rend="underline">citation</hi> & <hi rend="underline">ajournément</hi>)<lb/> contents are presecribed.<lb/> Are they the same? One <lb/>mention might have<lb/> served: Different? why<lb/> different?<lb/></p><p>58. or 28.<lb/> In the court <sic>stiled</sic> inferior<lb/> but relatively superior, <lb/>it appears not that<lb/> the parties are expected <lb/>to make their appearance.<lb/> for tho' they are allowed,<lb/> (art. 8.5.) they can not appear<lb/> without <foreign><hi rend="underline">avoués</hi></foreign>,<lb/>under which circumstance,<lb/> little advantage <lb/>would be derivable to the <lb/>bonâ fine suitor against <lb/>the malâ fide: since his<lb/> <foreign>avoué</foreign> would prevent <lb/>his making any admission <lb/>so far as, at the <lb/>interrogation <!-- blank space --> had been ordered <lb/>(85.1.)<lb/></p><!-- column break --><p>58. or 28. contin<hi rend="superscript">d</hi>.<lb/>the check on lying being<lb/>as above applied in the<pb/>inferionr Court only, and<lb/>not till after the commencement<lb/>of the suit with<lb/><foreign>avoués</foreign> to preserve the <lb/>mala fide client from<lb/>telling truth and not applied<lb/>at all in the Conciliation<lb/>court — the purpose<lb/>was, on pretence of reconciliation, <lb/>to give<lb/>birth to lies and altercations<lb/>which w<hi rend="superscript">d</hi>. keep it<lb/>at a distance.<lb/></p><p><p>59. or 29. <lb/>He knowns when it is <lb/> wished to apply a check <lb/>to lying: when not: he <lb/>applies it or not accordingly. <lb/> In the regular Court,<lb/> to an extraneous Witness,<lb/> he applies it: because <lb/>there, the Def..<hi rend="superscript">t</hi> has been <lb/>dragged in. In the preliminary<lb/> Court, where<lb/> he allows either or both <lb/>parties to appear, he applies<lb/> it not to the applicant:<lb/> for if forced to tell<lb/> truth and the whole truth,<lb/> the suit in the <unclear>inferior</unclear> <lb/>Court might then be</p> prevented.<lb/></p><p>60. or 30. <lb/>To examination of a person<lb/> under this check, he<lb/> gives three different <lb/>names, according to the<lb/> Court in which it is performed: <lb/>in the regular<lb/> nonpenal Court, performed <lb/>upon an extraneous<lb/> witness, it is <hi rend="underline">enquête</hi>: on a party, <hi rend="underline">interrogation sur<lb/> faits et articles</hi>: in a<lb/> Penal Court, <hi rend="underline">instruction</hi>. <lb/>This diversity, agreeable<lb/> to every eye that likes <lb/>confusion, he found, <lb/>and has left<lb/></p><p>61. or 31.<lb/> By altercation without <lb/>obligation to truth, obstruction <lb/>alone, not <lb/>help, can be applied to <lb/>reconciliation: and<lb/> where reconciliation <lb/>can not be effected, nothing<lb/> can in that Court<lb/> be done: uselsss vexation<lb/> is it's sole effect<lb/></p><p>62 or 32 <lb/>It gives the malâ fide <lb/>debtor so much additional<lb/> delay.<lb/> It gives to those rich <lb/>enough to buy it's assistance<lb/> additional<lb/> means of oppres:<hi rend="superscript">g</hi> those <lb/>too poor to buy it.<lb/></p><p>63. or 33. <lb/>The great majority<lb/> of Suits brought under <lb/>established procedure, <lb/>in non-penali, are<lb/> brought for debt, and <lb/>defended for delay of <lb/>payment. In thse,<lb/> there being no difference <lb/>of opinion, nor quarrel<lb/> which can be terminated<lb/> by any thing <lb/>but payment, there<lb/> is nothing to reconcile:<lb/> no good, therefore, capable <lb/>of being done by a <lb/>Judicatory, which has <lb/>no power to compel payment.<lb/></p><p>64. or 34.<lb/> This Bonaparte <lb/>and Romebred System, is <lb/>good perhaps in comparison<lb/> with the former <lb/>Romebred System & the <lb/>English bred System: but<lb/> bad, in comparison of<lb/> the natural &<lb/> the only good one, as<lb/> here proposed.<lb/> | <p>54. or 24. <lb/>Examination of either<lb/> party under this check,<lb/> he will not suffer till<lb/> the suit is lodged in hand,<lb/> in maximizing operations<lb/> & instruments by nullities.<lb/></p><p>55. or 25.<lb/> Brought thus in the bud<lb/> before an unfeed Judge,<lb/> the suit might have been<lb/> <sic>nipt</sic>: and reconciliation, <lb/>if the case admitted, <lb/>made.<lb/></p><p>56. or 26. <lb/>In Denmark, where Conciliation<lb/> Courts originated, <lb/>the object was to<lb/> keep suits, as many as <lb/>possible, out of hands<lb/> interested in maximiz..<hi rend="superscript">g</hi><lb/> expence and thence<lb/> vexation: in a considerable<lb/> proportion this<lb/> was effected.<lb/></p><p>47. or 27. <lb/>For the same instrum..<hi rend="superscript">t</hi><lb/> (summons to appear) <lb/>under it's tow names —<lb/> (<hi rend="underline">citation</hi> & <hi rend="underline">ajournément</hi>)<lb/> contents are presecribed.<lb/> Are they the same? One <lb/>mention might have<lb/> served: Different? why<lb/> different?<lb/></p><p>58. or 28.<lb/> In the court <sic>stiled</sic> inferior<lb/> but relatively superior, <lb/>it appears not that<lb/> the parties are expected <lb/>to make their appearance.<lb/> for tho' they are allowed,<lb/> (art. 8.5.) they can not appear<lb/> without <foreign><hi rend="underline">avoués</hi></foreign>,<lb/>under which circumstance,<lb/> little advantage <lb/>would be derivable to the <lb/>bonâ fine suitor against <lb/>the malâ fide: since his<lb/> <foreign>avoué</foreign> would prevent <lb/>his making any admission <lb/>so far as, at the <lb/>interrogation <!-- blank space --> had been ordered <lb/>(85.1.)<lb/></p><!-- column break --><p>58. or 28. contin<hi rend="superscript">d</hi>.<lb/>the check on lying being<lb/>as above applied in the<pb/>inferionr Court only, and<lb/>not till after the commencement<lb/>of the suit with<lb/><foreign>avoués</foreign> to preserve the <lb/>mala fide client from<lb/>telling truth and not applied<lb/>at all in the Conciliation<lb/>court — the purpose<lb/>was, on pretence of reconciliation, <lb/>to give<lb/>birth to lies and altercations<lb/>which w<hi rend="superscript">d</hi>. keep it<lb/>at a distance.<lb/></p><p><p>59. or 29. <lb/>He knowns when it is <lb/> wished to apply a check <lb/>to lying: when not: he <lb/>applies it or not accordingly. <lb/> In the regular Court,<lb/> to an extraneous Witness,<lb/> he applies it: because <lb/>there, the Def..<hi rend="superscript">t</hi> has been <lb/>dragged in. In the preliminary<lb/> Court, where<lb/> he allows either or both <lb/>parties to appear, he applies<lb/> it not to the applicant:<lb/> for if forced to tell<lb/> truth and the whole truth,<lb/> the suit in the <unclear>inferior</unclear> <lb/>Court might then be</p> prevented.<lb/></p><p>60. or 30. <lb/>To examination of a person<lb/> under this check, he<lb/> gives three different <lb/>names, according to the<lb/> Court in which it is performed: <lb/>in the regular<lb/> nonpenal Court, performed <lb/>upon an extraneous<lb/> witness, it is <hi rend="underline">enquête</hi>: on a party, <hi rend="underline">interrogation sur<lb/> faits et articles</hi>: in a<lb/> Penal Court, <hi rend="underline">instruction</hi>. <lb/>This diversity, agreeable<lb/> to every eye that likes <lb/>confusion, he found, <lb/>and has left<lb/></p><p>61. or 31.<lb/> By altercation without <lb/>obligation to truth, obstruction <lb/>alone, not <lb/>help, can be applied to <lb/>reconciliation: and<lb/> where reconciliation <lb/>can not be effected, nothing<lb/> can in that Court<lb/> be done: uselsss vexation<lb/> is it's sole effect<lb/></p><p>62 or 32 <lb/>It gives the malâ fide <lb/>debtor so much additional<lb/> delay.<lb/> It gives to those rich <lb/>enough to buy it's assistance<lb/> additional<lb/> means of oppres:<hi rend="superscript">g</hi> those <lb/>too poor to buy it.<lb/></p><p>63. or 33. <lb/>The great majority<lb/> of Suits brought under <lb/>established procedure, <lb/>in non-penali, are<lb/> brought for debt, and <lb/>defended for delay of <lb/>payment. In thse,<lb/> there being no difference <lb/>of opinion, nor quarrel<lb/> which can be terminated<lb/> by any thing <lb/>but payment, there<lb/> is nothing to reconcile:<lb/> no good, therefore, capable <lb/>of being done by a <lb/>Judicatory, which has <lb/>no power to compel payment.<lb/></p><p>64. or 34.<lb/> This Bonaparte <lb/>and Romebred System, is <lb/>good perhaps in comparison<lb/> with the former <lb/>Romebred System & the <lb/>English bred System: but<lb/> bad, in comparison of<lb/> the natural &<lb/> the only good one, as<lb/> here proposed.<lb/> | ||
</p> | </p> | ||
1823 Dec. 15
Constitutional Code or Procedure
5
II
Ch. Judicial Abuse by Pursuers obviated
5
§ 3. Bonapartes course.
Ch.
§.
54. or 24.
Examination of either
party under this check,
he will not suffer till
the suit is lodged in hand,
in maximizing operations
& instruments by nullities.
55. or 25.
Brought thus in the bud
before an unfeed Judge,
the suit might have been
nipt: and reconciliation,
if the case admitted,
made.
56. or 26.
In Denmark, where Conciliation
Courts originated,
the object was to
keep suits, as many as
possible, out of hands
interested in maximiz..g
expence and thence
vexation: in a considerable
proportion this
was effected.
47. or 27.
For the same instrum..t
(summons to appear)
under it's tow names —
(citation & ajournément)
contents are presecribed.
Are they the same? One
mention might have
served: Different? why
different?
58. or 28.
In the court stiled inferior
but relatively superior,
it appears not that
the parties are expected
to make their appearance.
for tho' they are allowed,
(art. 8.5.) they can not appear
without avoués,
under which circumstance,
little advantage
would be derivable to the
bonâ fine suitor against
the malâ fide: since his
avoué would prevent
his making any admission
so far as, at the
interrogation had been ordered
(85.1.)
58. or 28. contind.
the check on lying being
as above applied in the
---page break---
inferionr Court only, and
not till after the commencement
of the suit with
avoués to preserve the
mala fide client from
telling truth and not applied
at all in the Conciliation
court — the purpose
was, on pretence of reconciliation,
to give
birth to lies and altercations
which wd. keep it
at a distance.
59. or 29.
He knowns when it is
wished to apply a check
to lying: when not: he
applies it or not accordingly.
In the regular Court,
to an extraneous Witness,
he applies it: because
there, the Def..t has been
dragged in. In the preliminary
Court, where
he allows either or both
parties to appear, he applies
it not to the applicant:
for if forced to tell
truth and the whole truth,
the suit in the inferior
Court might then be
prevented.
60. or 30.
To examination of a person
under this check, he
gives three different
names, according to the
Court in which it is performed:
in the regular
nonpenal Court, performed
upon an extraneous
witness, it is enquête: on a party, interrogation sur
faits et articles: in a
Penal Court, instruction.
This diversity, agreeable
to every eye that likes
confusion, he found,
and has left
61. or 31.
By altercation without
obligation to truth, obstruction
alone, not
help, can be applied to
reconciliation: and
where reconciliation
can not be effected, nothing
can in that Court
be done: uselsss vexation
is it's sole effect
62 or 32
It gives the malâ fide
debtor so much additional
delay.
It gives to those rich
enough to buy it's assistance
additional
means of oppres:g those
too poor to buy it.
63. or 33.
The great majority
of Suits brought under
established procedure,
in non-penali, are
brought for debt, and
defended for delay of
payment. In thse,
there being no difference
of opinion, nor quarrel
which can be terminated
by any thing
but payment, there
is nothing to reconcile:
no good, therefore, capable
of being done by a
Judicatory, which has
no power to compel payment.
64. or 34.
This Bonaparte
and Romebred System, is
good perhaps in comparison
with the former
Romebred System & the
English bred System: but
bad, in comparison of
the natural &
the only good one, as
here proposed.
|
Identifier: | JB/052/039/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 52. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1823-12-15 |
54 or 24 - 64 or 34 |
||
|
052 |
constitutional code; procedure code |
||
|
039 |
constitutional code or procedure |
||
|
001 |
|||
|
marginal summary sheet |
1 |
||
|
recto |
d5 / e5 / f150 |
||
|
john flowerdew colls |
|||
|
16712 |
|||
