The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1865-11-30
The Law of restimouv.

We wonder lt has not occurred 10 aor,. a
the able lawyers Of the Southern Ststes /.
consider the question Of admitting nearoe.
70 q standing in court, as witnesses. frsls
toe Legal point Of view Il tiss purely leral
question: and the prevailing preiudies
settlement, OF to blind tae eyes er van ~
judgment Of men who comprehaud The Fro.i
Pslnei pies Of law, and are familiar with the
AAe recepuon of any witness in court al
justice and the credit attached 70 his siste-
menisi rest on 3 EatGrsi and instructive hr-
lei IN The general Yeraeity OF human tesii
mony when supported by an oath. in The
! courts Of this and nearly every other conn
~ TIE rule Of pratce a 10 reject the tasti-
moay oi an individual entirely, where Ger
'ein special reasona exist; 10 ether Gases ID
allows the witness 70 make his ssatemsnf
leaving is eredibilitT 90 Be estimated ~
the tribunaL Tais IS the distinction taEea
~ AZ the books, between the competency
ana ne credioillsy OF wituasses.
4he competency Of the witness is t. De
passed upon BY the judge the creiibIitv Is
70 De weighed By the jury. The inconpe-
loncy Of witness Is never 70 he presumed.
but it must be made % appear By an excep-
ton or ohiecticn taken before the court
who will determine this, as is does every
other collateral fact. In cases oj doubt in
the mind Of the judge, The Witness VIA
oe reserved, and the objection viii 20 b
als creaioility rather than his corapatencr. /
Y VII Be found By censnlGnr 5ay gooi /
YORK upon he principles Of the Law az /
Avidenee, that the only grounds On which /
ne evidence 9f q wines can with aug ap-
Psarance Of reason be rejected unhoard, are 1
reaueihle 70 four; 4. Want Of iuiallAet. .. 1
That the witness cannot or VII not take The /
required oath or affirmation. g. Criminal /
guilt. 4. Personal legal interest in the sue
eess OF defeat Of one Of the parties % the
~ would be an interesting subject for re-
search iuto the history OF Judicature, 10
sraes the fTmalion Of opinion upon this
question in the minds Of the best Judges of
nearly every age, until il finally reached its
2fesent coalition in our common law. aud
became clearly settled. The Old civilians |
md old lawyers cons 'dsred The giving Of ev-
aehce IN court OF justice 10 be q RIGHT
'ather than 8 duty, and consequently al
udged imeOmpetency a fitting punishment
or belief o. conduct upon which the laws
we're uesirous oi liking stigma Thus the
hcient law nxed lncomptenr y on erroneous
Y oDnoNious opinions. A. %. $50 heretics
I'D Jews were not in general allowed 10 ?
ear testimony against orthodox Christians. a
here heretlcs or Jews were parties he ev-
ienee Of both was received but the testi- I 9
lony Of Pagana, Namchears and aorna .
ther sects was rejected under an circurn-
-aneea- Very similar rules were followed q
y the eanonists. Sir Eiward toke, IN his q
ifst destitute, lays down broadly that an &
llael cannot be witness, bat cites no n
In Calvin's case, be savs. "All v
lhdels are in law perpetual enemies llor P
le law presumes not that they will be con-
arted, that being remote poss. bility, i6r b
,tWeen them-as with the devils, whose j.
l3jects they be-and the Christians there | q
perpetual hostility, and can be no peace" 81
This continued to be the rule ia England ! %
It'll the year I755, when the English Bench p'
,opted the rule Of the present day-that 81
ths are not peculiar 70 the Christian roii- ir'
on bot that their substance is essentially
e same everywhere aud in 81 cesesi that "a
material part Of the oath is rot the le
1de Of swearing, and that il ought % be p
jnsted % suit the csnscience Of each wit iic
So. = only necessary now Tor the uit- g.
O. 70 believe in an Avenger Of Felsehood, 30
entitie MS evidence to be received under "a
latever form Of cath he may cheese va
Fe q whether, as the Jews ct an early 60
rod were sworn, on the Peutateuch, with al
rered heads, Or a. the deposition Of III
ntoO has been received who touched with 70
hand the foot Of Bramin, or ss a Chi
- - ee9A aNllM " me NEEHmuuN OF / ~
,aking a saucer, and declaring that q he an
not speak the truth his s0al would be th'
ked like the saucer. aus
5esides the four grounds mentioned above Wo
which the testimony Of any witnesses res
y be rejected, there are other restraints nai
leh tend 70 hedge in still closer the linn an
lions which at frsg sight might seem 70 eri
rease whatever risk there may be ia ad- rec
ting negroes as witnesses, eithe- in thsir
q behalf Or in the causes Of others. me
long these are the nublieity nf judicial aeq
ceedings, the compulsory presence o. tro
noses, the right Of cross examination, ear
the iact that false testimony IS 40 Of ers
&c eognizabls by penal justice del
an any we'll informed rsader Of history sli
lsTs that grant Ct thisr right to the freed res
n Of the South. with all the checks thrown ral
at It for the sake OF Obtaining the truth
my question Gr controversy, which are tha
own about the white man Of this and ln6
~ other civilized eouotry. can work i1r
m or injustice 10 either white or black al
4 ought not this grave question Co be con- on
.red by Southern lawyers, without pre- the
lie, and simply Is a question Of lsW m
70uld hx q stain upon the bar Of the chi
thern Statsas If they suffered this matter iar
'e decided otherwise than in accordance col
h the long established and clearly defu- agi
avs OF cvideuce--N. 7. Post Ter