Case ID: dc_2/html/0405-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "the Court", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

United States v. David Bates.
    A person -who has given a receipt for goods to be delivered to other persons, is a competent witness for the United States, upon a prosecution against another person for stealing the goods.
    In all criminal prosecutions the Attorney for the United States, upon the general issue, has a right to close the argument before the jury.
    Indictment for stealing a box of books.
    Mr. Handy was offered as a witness for the United States.
    
      Mr. Morfit and Mr. Ashton,
    for the prisoner, objected that he was interested, as he had given a receipt for the books to B. French, stating them to be so many, more or less, to be delivered. to sundry persons. They compared it to the case of forgery, where the person whose name is forged is not permitted to testify ; and to the case of usury, where the debtor is not a competent witness until he has paid the debt.
   But

the Court

(nem. con.) overruled the objection.

Mr. Morfá, after closing his argument to the jury, contended that the Attorney for the United States should not be permitted to reply, inasmuch as the prisoner had not called any witness on his part, but relied on the defect of evidence on the part of the United States. The King v. Lord Abington, 1 Esp. Rep. 227.

But the Court (nem. con.) said that, however the practice might be in England, in this Court the attorney for the United States has always had the right, in criminal prosecutions, to close the argument before the jury, upon the general issue.

Verdict, guilty. Pardoned by the President of the United States.