... Hanc syllogen generalem materiae probatoriae

Neldelius (p.m.) on law 125, ff. eod. Menoch. 2, praesumt. 90, num. 1, 7, & 8. Donell. 17, comm. 12, lit. P. & 27, comm. 8, lit. E. and in both places, Hillig. Rauchbarus p. 2, q. 30, n. 15. Modest. Pistor. d. vol. 2, cons. 34, n. 66. Pacianus chap. 67, n. 13. Rulandus d. tr. p. 1, lib. 2, chap. 19, n. 13. Furthermore, because legal sanctions abhor a prolific crop of lawsuits, which obligation produces (Giphanius on the said law 47, n. 2). Hence it is said somewhere that that thought is modest which execrates lawsuits, l. 4, § 1, ff. de alien. mut. jud. caus. Parthenius, litig. lib. 1, chap. 3, n. 6. Donellus 17, comm. 1, lit. C, where Hillig. Heringius chap. 1, n. 26. But so that the quality of PROOF may be established more openly and certainly, and truth not be obscured (chap. 80, caus. 11, q. 3; Gayl 1, obs. 100, n. 1), the discretion of the judge, as an ordinary composer, ought to intervene (l. 1, § 1, ff. de testib. l. 22, § 1, ff. de R. I.), not indeed a brainless, captious, and reckless one, or one fashioned from affection and an indigested movement of the mind, but one conformed to the analogy of law and equity and the common judgment of a good man, Vvesenb. in παρ. ff. h. n. 3, at the end. Lord Arumaeus lib. 1, decis. 7, num. 16, & seq. Menoch. lib. 1, q. arbitr. 8, n. 14, & 17. Ruland. d. cap. 19, n. 3. Rosbach in prax. civ. tit. 4, n. 41, & seq. Colerius d. tr. p. 3, chap. 6, n. 7. Donell. 24, comm. 3, lit. C, where Hillig. Parthen. litig. lib. 2, chap. 18, n. 3. Heigius p. 1, q. 10, n. 38, & 3 seqq. What if the knowledge of the judge is contrary to the proofs alleged? Answer: That nevertheless, in the practice of the law, the credibility of such proofs must be followed, having set aside private knowledge. Compare the Most Ample and Excellent Lord Preceptor, Dr. Henricus Nebelthrah, Professor at Giessen, lib. 1, decis. 3, throughout, where he skillfully and learnedly defends this tenet, supports it with the force of most valid arguments, and removes and wards off the opposing obstacles of those who think otherwise. And thus, with the devoted and earnest praise of the Triune GOD, I most auspiciously finish this methodical and Inaugural EXPOSITION of PROOFS (albeit seen as somewhat removed from perfection and accuracy), with the following hemistich appended, full of modesty and frankness (as I believe):

Auctaria.

1. I establish that the examination of sorceresses (the water judgment / Wasserurtheil), as enemies of the common safety, by means of cold water, being irrational and compared to the temptations of divine power, is to be utterly abolished.

2. I deny that the flow of blood from the wound of a murdered person, ebullient while the murderer stands by, suggests an undoubted proof of condemnation.

3. I affirm that one adorned with the splendor of equestrian rank can lawfully perform the office of a procurator in some more eminent Tribunal.

4. I judge that adultery can in no way be proven by a lustful kiss alone.