difficulty greater than in the ordinary case of testimony in what does it differ the hardship of a to charge himself � what is that hardship wrong for if in the right there is no in what will aid or tend to aid the party uttering such testimony hardship the idea of on either side for if there is hardship in uttering the truth and it is uttered no follows and tiie other party being in the right his interests will best be promoted by the truth no questions are to be asked lest me party in the wrong should feel lest disturb the repose of fraud or bring dismay and terror to the hardship incident to the utterance of the truths the law of and to being in consequence thereof to perform what justice requires is the hardship too grievous to be borne the hardship of uttering the truth must not be permitted reluctance to answer hardship of answering what truly answered will lead to the performance of which otherwise would have been if sufficient reasons for from answering are much better reasons for from the performance of just as much better are they as is the performance more than the mere answering of inquiries if hardship should from answering the of performance should be a good bar to the claim for performance and to do right a reason for from the obligations of duty hardship ana never as reasons for if is hardship there is no if there is it is self serving there is not me hardship of a party s charging himself what is remarkable is that all this sympathy for hardship this dread of to the benefit and for the protection of the party in the right seeking has no to commit no hardship to endure in uttering his testimony the law fearing lest its in seeking to avoid his obligation might wound his conscience by a falsehood or his feelings by the truth him from w inquiry and thus renders the success of the wrong inevitable proof can be obtained from other sources the danger of from receiving tiie hardship of compelling the of those interested the general experience of mankind of the dangers arising from such testimony and the little reliance to be placed having been considered sufficient reasons for its it would seem impossible to conceive of any cases in which these reasons should be found for if the position be well founded that there is a probability of mischief from certain classes of testimony there can be no propriety in receiving testimony which ordinarily is found adverse to the truth but in fact however while the wisdom of the rule is assumed without foundation in practice it is found so utterly of right tiiat it is in instances without number indeed so many are these � so contradictory to the general rule and thereof � that were it not for the aid to be derived from the text books one would be at a loss to know which was the rule and which the exception the law of mr as he is with the principle of is none the less so with that of in his view as in that of every lover of the common law whatever is is ri ht exceptions utterly of a general rule founded in the highest are established it matters not to him he right onward and not a of his admiration of this development of conflicting and wisdom fraud trust and accident are the principal objects of that the has been guilty of fraud tiiat he has some trust in that he has taken some undue advantage of an accident are the ordinary of a bill and if the bill be sustained are true the peculiar boast of is its when the common law fails and this is to the virtues of its searching no one but a lawyer would conceive that resort to a court for its aid to compel the performance of what should have been done without its would be considered the best evidence of integrity on the part of the individual refusing or that it could be into an emphatic admission tiiat in that instance the party is worthy of credit and that his known integrity is a st against the danger of less would he suppose that under such circumstances integrity surpassing that of common witnesses would be of all the credit of witnesses is usually left to the intelligence and judgment of those who are to hear in the law measures and the of tiie in advance without reference to the truth or falsehood of his testimony in utter ignorance of all that can or from its weight it as uniformly exceeding the of one disinterested witness however great his integrity and that it shall always be regarded as true unless overcome by two witnesses or one witness and circumstances the party who would not be heard before a jury whose it would be thought dangerous for them to hear is to possess not merely average but all in by virtue of their portion in all tune past present and to come are to possess claims to while the is considered so unusually the the party wronged or that he is wronged is not even the in is no more than his brother the law of evidence at common law the in alone confidence whatever the danger in hearing parties that danger is increased when one is heard and under such peculiar circumstances the general rule in all cases of exceptions whether or common law seems to be this � increase the motive to and the danger of tiie for and remove the means of detection and an interested witness or party may be heard the of a party � and � uttered without the ordinary for misunderstood or are received while the party whose statements they are alleged to be is denied the opportunity of what is 