The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-10-27
q Irx INAELLIGENC u.
SOCIAL SCIENCE.
ANIMAL SESSION OF THE AME-
V SOCIAL sUtENCE ASSOCIATION.


The Proceedings of the Third Days Morn
Ina session-Essnys by DR.. Isasc Ray. Joseph
whartsn, aud u. Coxe-rhc Discussion.
The third day morning session of the American
social Science Association began at IL O'Clock In the
chapel Of the University OF Pennsylvania, President
Riiet In the chair
stated that hour would be allowed for discussion,
and desired that the census OF this year should be
considered. He said that this association had
already exercised some influence on the powers that
be regarding the manner Of taking the census. He
Statistical Bureau, who is thoroughly conversant
with the subecto give description OF the different
taken -
the methods of the several countries ormany years.
In some places househoders blanks are distributed
previously, and on Gel lain night designated they
are to be filled up, The number OF people in the
house during that night is given, and the fact stated
whether the residence OF each is permanent or tenn
poIary. These blanks are called FOR on the next
DAY by the enumeration. The difficulty OF
taking the census 6y the enumerator Is
is only partially adopted in our system We require
the to call upon the householder within
a given period. It is often impossible to find the
owner OF the property or the head OF the family,
and the information has often to be obtained from
servants Our system Is also the most costly.
While the officers are enthusiastic in the discharge
OF their duties and perform their work WELL the sys
EN- is very imperfect. This association should take
ONE action looking to a better plan In future.
Mr.. Il. Coke introduced the miners question, and
said that he thought the association should en-
deavor to procure papers showing what has been
done in England to prevent the strikes and troubles
stand idle ne-third OF the time.
nIr Coke moved that the Executive Committee
be empowered to procure all such papers. agreed to.
Mr.. Elliott moved also that the Executive Commit
tee of the association be requested to take such
steps may be necessary to secure increased aten
tion to the subject OF improved method in census
taking and to bring the matter to the consideration
of the proper authorities. Agreed to.
'xhe Evidence Of EsHortsi" by Or Isaac Ray
The first paper OF this IN ,rnlngs session was on
"Ihe Evidence OF Experts" by DR.. Isaac Ray Of
this city. The following is a full abstract:-
With one exception the testimony OF witnesses is
confined to facts within their personal knowledge.
70 promote the ends of justice it sometimes be-
comes necessary to obtain their opinions rather
than any facts, because it is not the ked facts
but the differences drawn from those facts that
is desirable TO know. The witness may have been
knowledge to which such facts belong, and is thus
able to attach meaning to the facts unknownto TO
others without that experience. Experts are re-
significance Of the same facts, and because they
appear at the call OF or the other party they
charged with testfyiI under a bias Some change
IN our mode of procedure is called for which shall
place skilled testimony beyond the reach OF impro-
per influences and render it perfectly reliable.
In the first place, the objections are not very
sound, and In the next, the changes suggested are
either mpracticabe or incapable of remedyng the
evils complained OF.
Discrepancy and contradiction are not confued to
skilled testimony. They occur, more or less in all
evidence and spring from the very constitution Of
the mind, All men do not see and hear the same
things precisely alike Is it reasonable to expect
unanimity in matters of opinion any more than in
matters of fact? scientific men differ on many i'm
difference is not regarded as strange, or in
dicatye OF improper oiaSes Why, then,
wtness-stand should he unanimous? Science is
progressive. Each inquirer contributes something
opportunity. These contributions may sometimes ] mes
convey discrepant meanings, because the limits of
IS determined by causes peculiar to the ina9rer
of thours his his Sesf ad Of Of eS a
his application and temperament. No one
can learn everything, nor avoid mistake
a4a a aad t IN few
from what they would be under more thorough in-
Vestigaton. Every contribution TO science is valua-
ole but no single one can be considered as the dna
and complete expression of the truth. They all repre-
sent stages steps towards the attainment OF the
hnal object no one of which could be dispensed
with without detriment.
Under these conditions, science makes its appear
ance on the witnessstand and thus it is that what
is ignOranty mistaken for conflict, and imputed to
ignorance or something worse, Is only different
phase OF the same general truth.
Again, experts must necessarily vary in their tes-
tim0ny, because their experience has been dife-
rent. No two can have had precisely the same eX-
perience. Their routes have diverged from each
other, the same phenomena ha appeared 10 them
under different circumstances some secret OF
nature has been disclosed to one which deaed the
inquiries OF the other and thus they have been led
to conclusions which, though apparently conflicting
lnvariable unanmity on the Witness stand would be
as rational as to expect ev ry judicial decision TO
express the united opinion OF the full bench; that
every historian should agree respecting certain
the spectacle Of chemists, or surgeons. or physi.
eans utterng conflicting opinions on questions
within their respective provinces?
II in any given the opinions of experts differ,
30 much the more important is it that they should
he given in evidence. The theory or our criminal
law supposes that the accused is entitled to the
benefit OF whatever can properly be alleged in his
favor He is not only entitled to any facts that bear
on his caSe but also tu any construction of those
facts that competent Judgment can supply.
Though dozen experts testify against him, he can
not be regarded as having had fair trial if the
solitary dissenting expert be excluded from tue wit
ness-Stand.
II is also objected to skilled testimony tnat It
seems to embarrass and confuse the jury when they
most need to be self-confdent and II this oh
lection is sound, then why not exclude ordinary
witnesses, for their testimony often contradictory
and especially the addresses or counsel, which are
essentially contradictory? These we admit, not
wlphsanding their defects, because il is the theory
OF our law that, on the whole the purposes of JUS
tice are best served by placing before the Jury
everything that bears upon the question at issue.
For this reason skilled testimony is admitted, in the
belief that even its contradictions If any there are,
are necessary to make the trial complete Instead
OF being reproach to our system, it is signal
triumph OF humanity, that 1t puts within the reach
OF the prisoner any fae any matter OF science that
will contribute to his defense
The contradiction so much complained OF is often
more apparent than real. Experts pursuing dine-
rent tracks OF inquiry may arrive at results appa-
fently connicting, but which may, nevertheless be
only supplementary the oHe to the other. Both NAV
be correct far as they go; they both but
neither embraces the whole truth. They have re-
garded the same matters of inquiry from opposite
points OF view, but what they see may be none the
less valuable. No single Individual has explored the
whole domain OF science, aud thus 10 may often
happen tnat the scendnc aspects OF question would
not be completely shown by any single individual.
Again, IL is objected that an expert testides In the
interest Of the party by whom he compensated aud
therefore he cannot help being under wrong bias.
Ii does not follow that because he engaged by one
OF the parties he must be necessarily partial and
sided The case having been explained to him be-
lore the trial, he has formed his Judgment upon il
according TO the weight OF the anticipated evidence
IL 1t is favorable to the party applying 10 him he is