The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1859-04-12 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY.

The Chairman, the Rev. H. F. YFATMAX, in charg-
ing the Grand Jury congratulated them on the small
calendar that they would have to dispose of, there being
only four cases for trial ' • and he then proceeded to draw
attention to a most important Bill which Lord Brougham
has introduced into the House of Lords. The Bill is
entitled "An Act for the better amendment of the law
of evidence, as well as in criminal as in the civil cues,"
and it enacts— "Any person on trial by indictment,
information, or any inquisition, whether for treason,
felony, or misdemeanour, shall be allowed to offer him-
self, if he shall so think flt, as • witness in his own
behalf, and.the wife of every person on trial as afore-
said shall be allowed, if she shall so think fit, to offer
herself as a witness on her husband's behalf; and the
husband of any person so charged shall be allowed to
offer himself as a witness on her behalf." So that now,
for the first time, said the learned Chairman, the pro-
visions of the 14th and 15th Victoria, cap. 91, are pro-
posed to be repealed, and that partition wall that kept
parties from each other and prevented them from acting
for or against each other, is broken down, and all per.
sons will be competent to come into a court of justice,
even if they are parties in the cause, to give evidence
in their own behalf. Now, under the 6th and 7th
, Vie, that great barrier was removed that kept persons,
out of the witness box who had an interest in the case.
'filet was a principle of the law introduced by the late
Lord Denman, and I believe there can be no doubt that
that law has worked remarkably well. And this prin-
ciple laid down in the 14th and 11th Victoria is pro-
posed to be carried still further by the Bill of Lord
Brougham, of whom I may ray that it is certain no man
alive has exerted himself so much as lie lass iii amend-
ing the law for the promotion of the interests of time
subjects of these realms, as well as for the attainment of
. . .

the great ends of public justice. It is for you to say—
we, as a Court. giving no opinion whatever as to the
policy or propriety of adopting this principle—
whether, in your opinion, that is a principle which
would be an amendment of the law; because, if so,
representing the public, you may even petition Parlia-
ment in favour of that principle ; and I feel assured
that any petition emanating from • public body like
yourselves will be received with great deference and
respect. The 2nd section goes on to enact that
every person offering himself or herself as evidence under
such circumstances, shall be subject to cross-ex-
ainination in like manner as other witnesses. Ncw,
here is the introduction of a principle quite new to
the laws and constitution of this oountry. Heretofore
—in your own court. for instance, you have evidence
only on one side—that is, on the part of the prosecution,
your province being to determine whether •priind Janie
case of guilt or innocence exists. When the case comes
to be tned before a petty jury, by whom the facts are
more closely sifted, other evidence is given on the part
of the prosecution; and the person accused can only
put in a voluntary statement made before the commit-
ting magistrate, or make • statement in defence, but not
upon oath, and we have been frequently compelled,
when • prisoner has made a most lucid statement, to
tell the gentleman of the petty jury, as a role of law,
that the best evidence they can act upon is that made
on oath ; and to leave it to them to decide whether the
nbo,tvgnivsewnournpoLoaLlii
sulniosuurirooutwdeig6iteins;7naonya that has
here will be • new creation of circuinstanoes and legal
facts, and consequently juries hereafter will be in this
position ; —that they will have evidence on oath given
by the prosecutor, and in opposition to that statement
they will have the statement of the prisoner also on
oath. It will simply be • matter of credibility between
the parties, which juries will have to decide. Coupled '
with poser to be examined on the part of the prisoner,
is the proviso that false testimony may subject him to
the pains and penalties of perjury. At present a person
niakinj any false statement not on oath can only be
guilty of falsehood ; but the moment his testimony is
sworn to lie becomes liable to the penalties of perjuiy.
In the nature of things there must be considerable per-
jury on the one side or on the other under such circum-
stances. In cases of ordinary affiliation the law has laid
down that the person who is charged as the father is
not charged with a public crime ' • he is not brJught is
jmouia ; and he is, therefore, capable of giving evidence.
I need not tell you I have seen, on such occasions, the
most flagrant acts of perjury tionnuitted, and I put it to
you if this act passes, and a man stands at that bar
charged with felony, perhaps wish the crime of murder,
affecting his life, whether he would not, if competent as
a witness, he likely to violate his oath by stating that
which is untrue? And therefore it is a very serious
question for the public to determine whether this alters-
time of the law, though possessing • certain amount of
justice and convenience, would not from the necessity
of the ease increase the crime of perjury. The learned
Chairman in cmclns on, referring to the Eke riri, or sic
men of Athens spoken of by Lord &loon to discern what
laws " waxed improper from the time," expressed his
regret that there were no such commissioners in this
country, and that the Government cif the country were
sillier too dull or too indifferent about the amendment
of the laws to carry into effect the alterations awl
amendments which from time to time had been proposed.