Richmond Indiana palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1837-1839, 1838-01-13
TWENTY-FIFTH CONGRESS.
SECOND SESSION.
FRIDAY, DECEMBER %, 1887.
DISTRICT CURRENCY.

FRIDAY, DEcEMBER %, 1887.
DISTRICT CURRENCY. /
The Senate resumed the consde ration of the
bill to restrain the circulation Of small notes in
the District Of Columbia. The question being 4
on the amendment of Mr.. Smith, Of Indiana
to exclude the intormer from receiving half the i
fine
Mr.. SMITH, Of Indiana, said Yesterday he
had moved to amend the bill under consideration,
by striking out thai part which created Il common /
informcr, and gave TO him onO-haIf Of the penal 1
ty. Daring the discussion ON that question yes
tcrday, he had heard from different parts Of the /
Senate the opinion expressed that there was no
case known to the law where person interested /
in the event of the prosecution could be witness
in favor of that prosecution. He would not at
this time dctain the Senate with a rccapitulation I
Of the arguments which he then submitted at |
length to the Senate i'll opposition to these opin-
ions: the array of legal talent maintaining an o.
pinion opposite to that which he enter tanned,
had caused him almost to doubt the subject. He
had, therefore, lawyer would say, since the
adjournment last evening consulted the authorities
ON the subject, and the result had been entirely
satisfac. to his mind, that he not mistaken
on yesterday in the matter He would read to
the Senate from Starkic on Evidence, a standard
work, what is now believed to be the law OF the
question. Mr.. Smith then read from the second
volume Of Starkie $50 in action by the party
robbed against tho hundred, he is competent
/
not only interested, but the plaintiff in the suit.
So interest is objection to compel cncy if all per-
sons who arc likely to know the fact are equally
interested And therefore the loser of more
than lOl at sitting is 4 competent witness upon
information under the statute of 5 Anne c. IA,
sec. 5, which subjects the winner to the forfeiture
of five times the money won, upon conviction,
and authorizes any person to for it, and there
fore any person is as much entitled to sue for II
as the witness. So in the case of cxtortion by
durcss, and in other similar cases which, from
their very nature, admit of no proof but by the
testimony OF the party injured, he is according to
Lord Holt, competent witness from necessity"
This clearly sustains the position that the Court,
without any enact mcnt by the Legislature, will,
er neccssitate, admit the illness, although he
may be interested in procuring the conviction Of
the accused.
He (Mr Smith) opposed to creating inter
estcd common in!ormers; the remedy was, in his
opinion, worse than the disease. What! will you
bride a set Of men to haunt your taverns, market
houses railroad dcpots, and other places of pub
lie resort, TO lay wait for, and act as spies upon,
all who visit yc..: c:t;, and then, III prose-
cution instituted by themselves, swear money in
I to their pockets? He trusted not He would,
: however, to accommodate this matter to the views
d of those who view it an important part OF the
BILL as far as he consistently could, withdraw the
=; amendment he had moved on yesterday, ant
move VIVA: appeared to him to be amendment
which would, in a great degree, correct the evil:
he complained Of. MI. Smith then moved an a
: mcndment which provides that if the prosecato
" shall offer himself or be admitted a witness TO
the prosecution, he shall forfeit all claim to an,
z part of the penalty which amendment adopt
u ed without a count. Mr.. Smith then moved L
strike out the following clause OF the bill as re
ported by the committee: SSummarlly and with
out DELAY, and with the right Of immediate dis
D. covcrv ON oath in all cases where the dcfendan
shall deny the issuing or passinc-or attempting
- >bo hill. check. draft other DdDcr n
IS, question"
He. (Mr. Smith) in making this motion, ha
-. two objects in view: first, to obviatc consltu
, ,ional objection which had been suggested BY tn
N Senator from Kentucky, Mr.. Clay,) and which
~ in his mind, had great weight; and, secondly,
., remove a feature which he could not be induce
= TO retain in the bill-that of requiring the accu
ed to answer oath to the fact OF his guilt or II
nocencc Sir, (Said Mr.. Smith, every Senate
n. must see at a glance, that this bill without the
mendment may exclude the right OF Jary trIa
in direct con,rav ention Of the principles OF II
Constitution. While he readily admitted hmse
~. to be disciple Of that school which recognize
lie the power Of the Supreme Court to declare d la
.,y passed bv Congress unconstitutional AMI vo
~ when clearly in conflict with that paramou
,se charter OF our liberty, yet It is not less II
.o duty Of the legislative department OF the Cover
mont to see that it does not transcend its consiIt
- ,;onal povcr in its enactmCnts. The amen
ment on that point puts this question ct rest;
leaves the question to be decided by the cou
irving the case, under the constitution and la
Gu governing the same. rs,
aid The other object Of the amendment he "
yer Sm,h) had already avowed. THIS bill IS o
red creating an offence heretofore unknown IN Il
to District, and Furnishing that offence with III
and. pains and penalties; and how is It proposed
on carry into effect its provisions! The answer
be- this question is furnished by that part of the
the proposed to be stricken OUT by compelling the
'Im PENDANT upon trial, to answer, on oath, as to
to quilt or innocence; crin,inate himself, to {
o. cover his own guilt, to subject himself to I
w pains and penalties of the law. SIR, (sald
ext, Smith.) such proceeding never can be tolera
Inc in this country. 1t can be resorted to with
my probation only where inquizitor,al power Is 8
and posed to be necessary calm the guilty fears
my some despotic tvrant, or to furnish victims for
;nouisition But in carrying into effect our Ia
for the suppression of offences, either mdia ."
Mr. or ,nala prohibit, the principle has been jus
con. discarded. and he could see no reason VII,
IN, should be resor:ed TO in this case. He had b
no, lonc since we'll satisfied that there was no gres
,;nc errors committed by Legislators than that OF
: S, ,iplyiug oaths all occasions. and particular
and where the persons wearing interested in
80. waiter in controy 1t has been truly said
-: r;,ers on the subject, that s'where you SOW o.