Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1853-12-01
CODE OF PRACTICE.

This code contains the following sections:
l. No person offered as a witness shall be ex-
cluded by reason of his interest in the event of the
action
q No person offered as a witness shall be ex-
cluded by reason of conviction of crime.
1t may be here stated that these sections might be
stricken out Of the code and would not affect its
general merits They are therefore only offered as
improvements in the law of evidence.
The reason why witness interested in the event
of an action has been excluded is that lis testimony
was supposed not to be relied on. The New ORR
commissioners say: 'the only just inquiry IS inns
whether the chances of obtaining the truth are
greater from the admission or the exclusion oil snch
witness Who that has any respect for the society
in which he lives can doubt that upon this principle
the witness should be admitted? The exclusion OF
witness interested in the event of the action goes
upon the idea that in majority of instances men
are so corrupted by their interest that they will per-
ure themselves for it. and that besides being cor
rupt they will be so adroit to deceive courts and
juries. This is contrary to all experience. In
great majority ofinstances the witnesses are honest,
however much interested, and in most cases of dis
honesty the falsehood of the testimony is detected
and deceives no one. Absolutely TO exclude an in
terested witness is unsound in theory as 1t IS IN
consistent in practice father may testify Tor his
son. A child living with his father and dependant
on his bounty may testify for the father. is the
Immediate gain of dollar potent as to outweigh
integrity while affection, the tie OF blood, ana de-
pendence are bat dust the balance? There Is not
another rule of evidence so prolific of disputes, IN
oertainties, and delays as this Not circuit held
but that question after question is raised upon it
not a term where exceptions growing out of it are
not debated. 1t is wiser to place the witness on the
stand and let the jury judge of his testimony"
In England in 1913, Chief Justice DENHAM
brought forward measure of this sort 1t was
headed an act to improve the Law of Evidence. "
1t was as follows Whereas the inquiry after
truth in the courts of justice is often INSTRUCTED by
incapacties created by present laws and it is desir
able that full information as to the facts in issue
should be laid before those who appointed to
| decide upon them, and that such persons should
exercise their judgment on the credit of the wit
ness adduced therefore, be it enacted that no per
son offered as witness shall hereafter be excluded
by reason of incapacity from crime or interest from
giving evidence either in person or by deposition
according to the practice Of the court notwhstand-
ing such person may have an interest in the matter
in question or the event Of the action.
Chancellor BRoUGHAM speaks of this act in the
following language: "This is certainly the greatest
measure that has been carried under the head of
judicial procedure since the statute Of frauds that
is since the revolution. 1t places the law of ev-
dence upon rational footing and makes its provis
ions consistent with themselves. 1t protects judges
and iures and parties from the miscarriages here
tofore constantly produced by the exclusion. of i'm
portant testimony, wisely opening the door to the
witness, but reserving the estimate Of his credit
and the value of his evidence to those who are to
Judge the cause. 1t sweeps away numberless nice
and subtle dstictions disencumbers our jurispru-
dence of heavy load of useless decisions resting
upon refnements, not principles; and abrdges the
trial of causes by shutting out those debates that
used daily 10 arise the admission Of proofs which
the commol sense of mankind at once pronounced
should be received and which the law itself did re-
ceive in ott er instances not distnguishabe by the
naked eye of plain reason. There have been few
greater improvements in our judicial system than
those which are effected by this valuable statute"
| Since the passage of this law in England, State
after State has enacted it, and from quarter have
we heard any complaints that it has produced per-
uries or that it has not advanced the cause of truth
and justice, under the searching scrutiny of courts
and juries. Experience fully sanctions its adoption
Although these sections are not essential to the
successful blending of common law and chaneery
courts they are useful and valuable provisions and
ought to be retained.