The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1874-01-02

,h;,;t, ~ apy witness on the stand, 1t is the
dntv NJ the Jury not only TO carefully scrutin-
re and consider the means OF knowledge, the
msrner and apparent candor or want OF candor
,yhan an the stand, but also the motives OF the
witness aud bis interest in swearing truthfully
Vi lave nave been asked to advise You az TO the
,va;cht 10 be given 10 the testimony OF Amos
Morris in case you should md that he has vii
s,,IIv sworn false concerning any material fact
;ia''ooIved IN the case. in case YOU should 80 find
nou will apply to bis testimony the same rule
~ would 10 any other witness under like
oo'ycumstances. The old rule which we so often
hear quoted, "that IL witness has wilfully
testified falsely in one particular he must be
wholly discredited, has OF late been very much
relaxed. and the Courts, taking more rational
view OF the question, are now generally dspos-
ed 10 leave the whole question to the Jury.
whose business 1t is to weigh all the testimony
in the case and 10 give effect to 1t according to
the conviction 1t produces upon their minds.
OF course such false testimony should seriously
affect all that the witness has sworn to and no
credit ought TO be given to any alleged fact
depending upon his statement alone: but
when coroborated by other proof or crcum-
stances, it may receive such credit as 1t appears
TO the jury 20 deserve.
In regard to the credit to be given to a WIT
ness whose general reputation for truth is bad,
| should perhaps remind you that the mere
fact that man is delinquent IN paying his
debts is not to be considered as evidence to
discredit his testimany. II Is his reputation
for truth that is 70 affect his credit.
In weighing the testimony OF witness 1t is
important Tor the Jury to know what are his
inherent moral qualities And though these
are too deeply ingrained III the soul to be reach
ed by human testimony, vet the corrupt foun-
tain may sometimes be discovered by the out
flowing stream. Peculiar clrcumstances-strong
temptatlons-may sometimes induce q good
n wi tka uOrld lie nnat IN
en- Hence particular isolated instances or a
departure from truth are not 10 be taken as
endence or such degree OF depravity as to
render the witness unworthy of belief. On the
contrary. where the moral qualities OF a witness
are so corrupt as that in his daily intercourse
with his nelghbors, his acts and language as
the medium for the development Of his charac-
ter are such az to induce the conviction that he
has no regard for truth. or so little that other
evidence is, in general, required TO corroborate
his statements before they can be accepted as
true-and when this conviction becomes gene
lal IN this community, we may be pretty certain
that the witness is possessed OF inherent moral
qualities which render his testimony far lees
reliable than that OF men II general. But 1t
does not follow that lie has testified falsely in
relation TO the Issue involved IN the present
pending suit; but il is q question for the Jury
to determine as to the weight or his testimony,
III view Of al the surrounding facts and cir
cumstances to which his testimony relates, as
also his motlves-if any-whlch in the judg-
ment OF the jury operated upon his mind,
Jurors sometimes labor under the impression
that their deliberations are to be governed by
inheXible, unbending rules, that their conclu-
sions must be arrived at through some unnatu-
raj process. through rules purely arbitrary and
ARTIFICIAL. While it is true that certain rules are
deemed necessary to enable us to discriminate
between truth and falsehood, those rules are
by no means complicated or arbitrary; They
are 1.-THE practical maxims OF legal and phllo-
sophica sagacity and experience. matured and
rnethodized by a succession OF wise men, as
the best means OF discriminating truth from
error and of contracting as far as possible the
dangerous power OF judicial discretion. They
have their origin IN man nature as an iptellec-
tual and moral being; and are founded IN the
charaties Of religion. IN the philosophy OF
nature, in the rules of history and in the expe-
rience of common life" Wis Cir. Er. 245,
Il is not contended on the part OF the People
that any one saw Matteson forge the motgage
in question: but the prosecution contend that
they have established facts and circumstances
from which the Jury must infer the guilt OF
the defendant. You must group together all
the facts and circumstances which you find
established beyond a reasonable doubt, and
then. applying to them the legal tests, inquire
whether. on the whole they carry conviction to
the mind that the respondent is guilty.
When we rely upon one fact to establish
dentiary iact-a fact furnishing evidence or the
existence OF some other fact fundamental
rule n relation to circumstantlal evidence is,
that from the facts proved the theory contend
ed tor must naturally how
Much has been said during the argument, in
relation TO the kinds OF evidence, and as to the
effect which they should have upon the mind.
You are not TO overlook the fact that the con-
sciousness that the law Furnishes offenders, in
duces persons who commit crime to avoid
publicity and the general rule is, that the
greater the crime the greater the secrecy with
which 1t is perpetrated. In such cases 1t is
often impossible to furnish positive evidence.
TO require it IN order to secure conviction.
would be to throw open the doors to crime, and
work dissolution of civil society.
THE advantage OF positive evidence Is that
it Is the direct, positive testimony of Witnesses
to the fact to be proved, who, il he speaks the
truth saw it done, and the only question is
whether he is entitled to belief. The daSddcd1a-
tdqe il that the witness may be false and COR
rupt, and the case may not afford the means OF
detecting and exposing the falsehood.
"In the case of ciIcumstantal evidence, on
the other hand, the witnesses testify not to the
ultimate fact TO be proved, but to number OF
intermediate facts from which 1t may be infer
red. The testimony OF the witnesses as applied
to tie intermediate facts, is subject to the
same causes Of error, as II they were ultimate
facts. And an additional disadvantage attend
not only to weigh the evidence OF facts but to
draw Just conclusions from them.
"But circumstantial evidence possesses GER
tain advantages not to be overlooked. In the
actual occurrence OF human life, nothing is in
consistent. All the real circumstances IN any
event which actually transpirea :nust re consis-
cent with each other, and harmonic perfectly.
Everything that really does happen 10 consis-
tent with all Its parts. In detailed account
OF transaction where ali the surrounding facts
are made TO appear mlnutely, and assume each
a place in the narrative. If there be any one or
more which have been fabricated or misstated,
the fact so falsely stated must stand alone - 1t
cannot agree with the others and make con-
sistent whole because ii is false-it never had
an actual existence and Is improperly there
Usually where the evidence is clrcumstan-
tlal. there are numerous witnesses testlfying to
a great variety Of facts and circumstances, some
OF which may appear lmmateral at first, and
whose true relation to each other cannot be
perceived until they are all grouped together.
And thus the chances OF a fraudulent combine
ton OF witnesses to mIsrepresent The fact Is
greatly diminished.
Human ingenuity is not equal to the inven-
ton OF q series Of circumstances, each agreeing
perfectly with the others, and all agreeing with
all other known collateral circumstance
When. therefore the circumstances proved are
numerous, and testified to by different witness
es, and they together form a connected chain
Of circumstances, each and all concurring 10
establish the hypothesis OF guilt, and to be ac-
counted for on no other reasonable hypothesis,
the mind may be led TO inference and conclu-
sions as strong a. those arising from positive
nd ba Of