Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-06-25
BIZ FLEAsANTs & BUTLER.7
RICHMOND, FRIDAY. JUNE

legnls - II
The Counsel believes It to be principle Of
UNIVERSAL law, founded on reason and ;,,,t;ce
and IN the Courts to which he has been accus'
toned, mover disputed, that the Prisoners de.
Je'ce y az teasf as extensive the Prosecutor
attack, and that he may be allowed to I;snrn,,s
whatever the prosecution is allowed to n,o,s
wretched, indeed, would be the condition Of
enc on trial, as in this case, for his honor. ON
triai 10 many cases for life, or the principle. If
true, applies to such cases rs well as Others ! Il
facts OF the most datnning nature against him
may De stated as proofs by the prosecutor. which
true, ought to have an influence in his CASE
and ne should be denied the poor boon of Dis,
proving them, or OF Weakening their ESrce.
ana II he may do this, he may draw his iiustifi
catory and extcnnatory matter from the iips of
any witness, and from none with SO much pro.
Priety as from the lips of the very witness
who furnished the matter of impntation a.
gainst hirn- BY allowing the Inputation to
appear on the record, the Court has made lc-
gal the question to disprovc or To mitirate Il
even II ats legality could otherwise be question
able.
But its legality rests on higher and better min
c'pics; n higher and better principles were need
iuL The prisoner may claim, and on his he
hall, his counsel does claim, So greater. i.t;txdcn
OF inquiries in his defensive examination. than
IS petmtted to the prosecutor on its exarnina.
tion IN chief. s'Iie may cross examine the nit
ness as TO eocryPar of his tcs,irnony.n quote
the very words of an eminent lawyer and writer.
lst Chisty, 427. In his cross examination.
every mode of inquiry is legal, which he can de-
wise, either to disproye fact stated against
hun, or to impair its force and application, or 10
weaken the confidence of the Court IL, Tic ,cit1ess
him In a..
en- SO lar from being bound to limit himself to
the facts existing in the case, may even assume
as true, facts existing only in imagination, and
by course OF inquiry, predicated upon this as
sumption, elicit information for his benefit.
See 1st entity, 427.
HE may also put esintroclucsory questions.
questions whose immediate bearing and one
ration on the matters in issue do not aooear but
which serve as pioneers to open the way 10
osncr questions a, reseroe, which do bear ON
the point. And in the application of this rule.
the second discretion of the Court is to deter.
NINE what may be received or not In other
courts OF Civil and Criminal jurisdictions and
especially OF the latter character, this is conf
ded by the Court to the Judgment and discre-
hon OF the prisoners counsel, and no restriction
is impoced but in cases of gross and often re-
peated abuses OF this confidence. These Courts
think 1t better to submit to some abuse of their
patience, rather than the prisoner should be cir
cqmscrlbcd IN any matter of inquiry which nav
possibly ieadto any illustration of his innocence.
For the general principle of cross-cxamination
anu Introductory questions, vide Philips eo;5
anu o. But the Court has minated, flat the
latitude oil examination is still subject to some
limits that it must be relevant and confined
TO the matters on which the Court is TO decide.
The council frankly comedies this /: having. no
mouyes, either personal or professional for
withholding his distinct admission TO any propo-
sltion, however it may effect this easel which
his honest Judgment believes to be correct. He
might then indeed be allowed to dep,ore that the
lrre!cyancy OF the matter to which the question
refers had not been discovered before the mat
ter itself, which ELECTS the question, had been
received on the record but he would rather Iis
client should submit to all the mischief, which
Its Introduction, now irreparabie, might bring
along with 1T, then lend himselfiu any solicita.
ton TO tue establishment Of princi. les subyer-
s,ye OF law, ofright, and justice. He grants,
therefore, freely, unreseryedly grants his entire
concurrence with the limitation on the rigbt of
intimated by the Court. II
must be relevant and applicable to the matter
onwhIch the Court is to act, and tending to as
slst the mind ofthe Court, the Judgment Which
1t ought to pronounce. 1t remains only for the
counsel to prove that it does relate to such mat
te.5, and that the conclusions to be drawn from
the witness to this land to many other, questions
OF Ike character intmated to be put to liln)
is nldlsPensaole to the sentence which the Court
'c,H DC called ON 10 pronounce.
The charges against the prisoner inpute to
hlm malice, and the chief head and front of this
offending consists n.His One Of tho charges
rests as to fact, entirely and soloky on the tes,i
mony of Captain Porter, and the malice which
IS the chief ingredient in all, is chiefly to be in
ierred, II inferrible at all, from his statement
w hateyer tends to prove his state of mind to be
hostile, revengeful, or prcjudicial against the
prisoner, detracts SO much from the weight of
his testimony; and if the prisoner can furnish
evidence that the prosecution was conceived in
a miicious temper towards him, that fact would
not only take off the imputation of n,ulice from
the prisoner, but lead to other consequences
TASTY important to this trial. Now, the answer
TO this question bears strongly on this matter.
For if Captain Porter gives an affirmative an
swer the prisoner will reply on that answer TO
prove 'mPfacaote hostility in the ,oitness who, al
though he cannot now be ignorant of the prison
ers innocence of all criminal come ion with the
matter which produced that publication, and
although the prisoner hopes and expects to prove
by other evidence, that the witness EXPRESSED
nmseit satisfied on these points, yet now, in opep
Court, and where his honor is in jeopardy, seeks
70 oVerwheim the prisoner by a'crucl repub!ica-
'on VI thdt very Hoel. And as The prisoner in
tends to prove that state of mind by numerous
other circumstances, such an answer would be
highly corro5oratiUe of them. Should the wit
ness, however, give a negative answer, the pri-
soDer means TO reply on the ,oaaton introduc-
ton OF that statement (Which such an answer
would disclaim all beIiefoD as decisice proof
OF the same temper in The tcixess. So that any
answer 'ciH bear on the question IF malice, and
on the 'oe5ght which should be gioea To tie tesfi-