The Delaware register, or, Farmers', manufacturers' & mechanics' advocate. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1828-1829, 1829-06-13

Ns,o York. June 9-We learn that Sailing Master John
coupb one of those who wounded by the explosion
the Fulton steam ship, expired last evening We regret to
add that little hopes are entertained OF the recovery OF Lieut.
Patt.
John Hough gunners mate, marine named Carr, and the
Boatswain.
Mem York, June 10-We are happy to learn that
we were misinformed with regard to the death of
saing-master Clough OF the frigate Fulton. Our
information explicit-though happily erroneous.
-~s9s~-
From the Telegraph.
Competency of Witnesses.-The competency of
witnesses, on account of their religious opinions, was
again aeatet at the late Morgan trials in Canandai-
gaa Lyman Aldrich was offered as evidence against
Whitney and ellis but their counsel objected TO his
being sworn on the ground of his atheism. 1t was
contended and witnesses were brought prove that
Adrich's opinions were exactly similar to those of
Gddns, whose testimony was refused at former
court. Adrch, it proved, had repeatedly stated
that " he believed all the punishment he should ever
receive, would be in this word'-that he had repeat
edly conversed with Giddins, and was convinced of
the correctness of Giddins falkland that he fully
concurred with the remarks in Gddins letters, deny
ing the existence of future state. Joseph Adams
swore that he conversed with Aldrch respecting the
rejection of Gddins testimony-that Aldrich remark
ed, :" if they impeached Gddins, they would impeach
him, (Adrich) as he was of the same opinion > and
as for future punshments, he (Aldrlch) Mould as
soon SUedr 10 one thing another"
After some remarks from Mr. Griffin against the
competency of Aldrich, and speech by MIR Spencer
the question of excluding witnesses for peculiar
ligious enets, Judge Howell stated there was great
and increasing difficulties in these questions The
court still adhered to the rule by which Mr. Giddins
rejected, but majority doubted whether the tes-
tmony against Aldrich brought him within that rule.
He Judge HoweD dssented from his colleagues,
Judges Price and Rawson, but he cheerfully submit
ted to their decision, and would permit the witness
(Aldrich) to be sworn" The Judge further remark
ed that " the decision of that court, excluding Mr.
Giddns, had been egregiously misrepresented in the
newspapers. The point which referred to future re-
wards and punshments, expressly reserved by the
Court. Mr. Giddins, he said, was excluded because
he did not believe in Supreme Being who holds men
accountable for their conduct No man can be
witness who denies his accountability to Supreme
Being. Such and is the opinion of this Court,
and such is the law of the land.''
The counsel then called for the opinion of the court
on the point, whether witness believe in future
rewards and punlshments.
Judge Howell stated that he now concurred in the
opinion of Chancellor Waworth, disagreeing with
the decision of Chief Justice Spencer The present
Supreme Court has adopted the opinion of Chancel-
Tor Waworth. Aldrich then sworn, some wit
nesses testiyng that although he disheeved in state
OF rewards and punshments, he had expressed a be-
llef in Supreme Being.