National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1881-11-09

that is the reason that tho crfren 6iisi was an
onense OF 90 much magnitude aud was regarded as
an Infamous thing. maintain here that
NO OTHER PROPOSITION CAN Re MAryrAfNgp
or sustained by authority from the books than this
that an Infamous onense Is that which relates
not TO the judgment-not to the punishment hut TO
the character of the crime. And fmainiain here
that tho character Of the crime alone Il the
measure Of the infamy and there Is not book
that does not-whon ii comes to interpret whatthe
law has donc-starling with these great men, these
masters of the law, does not maintain that those
the administration by public Justice those
onenses that are connected with conspiracy
to take life by an abuse Of the processes ofthc law
aud by false informatlons and accusations, aud
these alon are the ofIcuscs that are included
within the category Of Infamous ohenses Now,
how much has passed away Of tho old law But
these thugs have come down to us untouched by
time. only made more solid and substantial aud
established. How much has passed away?
THE CONDITION OF SOCIETY
TO which have adverted and referred, and which
required that this ofCnsc should hJ Of that class
the crtmcn Jdist-and be made an Infamous ofiense,
has passed away. How much, ! say has passed
away2 | could not help but smile some time ago,
when ran through these volumes, TO see how
criminal. Why. aatIery Of n prince was made
the subject Of n criminal information and indict-
ment aIininL appeal of felony trial BY
would lament very much--beneht Of Clergy. We
have only to remember that when Henry H. as.
cended the throne the lrst net of that vigorous
monarch was To put down twelve hundred castles
that were owned by robber barons. advert 20
thnt Tor me purpose OF showing now the wh0lc
time depended upon Just such crimes US this-dc-
pended upon maintaining the law and punthing
Just such crimes
As INFAMOUS, As cRpIES rAtsf
Everything was military The necessities Of the
law related TO the military. IL was the mnnte-
nance of ioTtidcationS the repairing and main;
money aud ships To the crown 10 defend the
tsnlh, lnN was Tue heSesslty OF lHc soc,ai o,uei.
Now si nero ~ vsieuIa a S.sc 'iu I'M yv,vn
adv. teu - w. cso"' on tbis sSbie"i I mini
BLISS rer's '"''S -, the most to DO
1t OF MT SS,s - -~s Vile de Vas
respected IL u" EY, Cnsg ,Si,,.a a. WILLIAM
eoyie IN Dodson, w was obIiScS IN Inn, ,,r,.,s
SCoWi that great man "es Vvns.u m uIa. suVev
public case ~ LORD COclliSs vi uiSHs " IT. uysVp
squarey. ms testimony waS o.3vVV,, e. S Sn ,uo
crime. Aud that he had been cob, 'otai OF what
~ conspiracy ~ conspiracy ~ W. c VIII, ~
Mh 90 Sf Sy ITioa w i% Ms ed E RS
charge. and think all who read mat triM WI
feel that injustice was done
There was a good deal of personal anlInus min.
gied with e. lie was convicted. You never
heard :; hin nI hts TSr s s S vas Vas Ss
iSil within tic category of Infamous oiIunses aud
that Ills testimony Should not DO taken What
Iid Sir William scot, loY lie considered Il as ho
alone of tho great iudses that lived in England
then could consider n take his opinion then
he inv ,Ipon The subject NndihSn with a mod.
csty that Il touching, he saws
lam not 4 common lawyer, and I do not undertake
to Interpret this upon the authority OF my Knowledge
rs q common lawyer am OF the civil law anti
know the civil law thoroughly, The common lawI
hes, w, nlpnnaido ,o, inst sotcrc,, and seo how
bcantfiJy itsustains authority of TINT opinion
n mo tirf nlncs rrjt1gn Giisi wos an ofIeIse thnt
tyns narrowed nom tho civil law Ifnnyltoty uu-
derstood what crfD,Si fdisi was, as il was in tho
civil law il was sir William scott In The second
Mace with a dinidmce and modGsty TINT became
Kin, ana which rcnrdinteI tho Thought az having
an op''Um 'nu', SUN % 49,
"I ANAL w 'iL ''pot' ". ihn No,''O' n,"
Justice Abbott and Lord Tcndcrden Say. Now,
sir here Is man who understands the civil law,
could interpret that phrase ace9ring 70 INC ciyil
philosophy, and who called on the fathers OF the
law just ms Parliament used to take the opinions
OF the twelve judges ms they did In the Hastings
case aud Kingston ease He took their opinions,
Ie Says nst this Offence CGs"; or conspiracy
ing IT., Is not infamous, and does
not exclude a man from being witness inncourt.
There seems TO have been little confusion here
about right II Is not mans right alone to bca
witness. tits n duty. IL Is an individual priyi.
lego of malI. Why, II is the privilege Of tho
sutton to have him II Is the privilege OF the
Judge, who will not permit an abuse of Justice, and
requires information Don't let us confuse
rights anu duties. You henI nen ia,king OF tnelr
,Ignsi uu u v,Fe'y ' st;na rho I'LL, 10 phe .
ror is r,sht IL dn,v This Re moi 10 be
.uu, ~ NV q ~ -, idnas ,,rnr Thar
subject here, which i would be wei . dispel:
% sn, , n,o i"'t Synn, vol, N tatc theIn
up"l ~ eonsdnr those cnses which
NV olnidaS ~, ~, S,ote ,she,ein NN' "'
"'e u''lueu ~ "s 1'', wv, r',,ss or,,
| THIS SUBJECT OF INFAMOUS offENsEs
Is considered from9 Casey, beginning In 80 INCLUDE
GLIDING II Pierre Smith, which was In u. and
which met this question squarely and decided IL.
Now, what is the policy oithe law at the present
time on tho subject Of admitting witnesses? Is
the policy of the law to exclude witnesses Is
not the policy OF the law TO receive everybody,
with very few exceptions, and let II go to their
credabity The barrier that once excluded
men on the ground OF incompetcncy, aud all tho
lelrning that was accumulated upon those refine
ments when were mhuc IN inc DOCKS upon theso
subjects, have been swept away forever, ana H INC
coming back TO where we were when man could
wager his law, which Is another thing OF INC com
| Slnde cose In 4 or OF Cope which lord Jenkins
pronounced 10 be- one of the abomina,
lions OF the law. The principal estab-
s doc ~, me- of hc cHSe IN lien of he action of
debt a man brought an action on the case to re-
cover and nc offered to wager his law TO recover
the sum due and the answer was that Il man
could only wager his law In answer TO a demand
for n sum certain. lie could not swear as 10 tho
payment of an uncertain sum, such rs was alleged
| In Tho oction on ths ease mud thnt did away for
ever sr' with the wager by law. And then came
rms or ,rIrrr or en- ,rps
TIE stALulh or rnAVns' ,,,, +,
tended 70 DO what TO prevent the cSlseqnsncei
action in thNt way and the party defendant was
prevented from protecting himself by his oath.
And now we have como back again. and what II
+ couiyalent to wager OF law Is now seen every
nTintinm hill hero In Conpross tho whole law
pprIbnU"e was broken down unon TINT snbioct
and the party who was before excluded be.
cnnsc hc WINS Incompctcnt Is now received
aud il goes TO his crcdibiity only to his credi,
MlIty md tho hooks are fill Of such dcclnrntoits
by Judges, and that system is done away with