In Britain's law of evidence, if one tried to define the very concept of hearsay evidence, opinions would vary widely, with no settled conclusion. Some believed hearsay referred to explicit or implied assertions of fact made by witnesses unable to testify in court, as well as facts recorded in documents submitted to the court when no witness testified.
People tended to place a certain trust in words and paper, while others trusted testimony provided by witnesses more, especially words spoken after placing a hand on the Bible and swearing an oath. Yet not everyone regarded swearing as a serious matter. Even with a hand on the Bible, they would still lie.
Dying declarations, public documents and records, and authoritative publications discussing public affairs all possessed the characteristics of hearsay evidence, yet could be admitted by the court as exceptions and become evidence for establishing facts. But when confronted with facts contrary to physics or supernatural in nature, such as witches and ghosts, the evidence presented to prove such claims was often unreliable. Supernatural events would never be supported by the "best evidence."
Once there were "exceptions," more and more exceptional circumstances emerged, growing increasingly complicated. England's procedural law of 1800 could scarcely be called a "system." Including enclosure laws, its procedures were exceedingly chaotic, full of temporary, arbitrary, and incomprehensible products, created largely by lawyers and judges. Hearsay evidence in particular was a disorderly mixture of "exceptions," "rules," and "rationalizations," which was why Bentham studied and sought to reform the law of evidence.
William Coke's two deceased wives could not possibly appear in court. It was absurd, yet there was no direct evidence proving that William Coke had killed his wives. Circumstantial evidence first had to persuade the judge or jury to recognize the existence of evidentiary facts, then infer