Case Name: Merriman v. Way
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1791-08
Citations: 1 Root 283
Docket Number: 
Parties: Merriman v. Way.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 283–284

Head Matter:
NEW HAVEN COUNTY,
AUGUST TERM, A. D. 1791.
Merriman v. Way.
A person interested in the question on trial cannot be a witness.
ActioN of the case for words — declaring that the defendant had said that John Merriman, the plaintiff, had swore falsely and had perjured himself, in a certain trial before the grand jury upon a prosecution against Samuel Hough for stealing some grain, by testifying that Hough was the thief and had stolen the grain, and that Hough was acquitted. Issue to the jury on the plea of not guilty.

Opinion:
The defendant offered said Hough to prove the truth of the words; who was objected against, and by the court not admitted.
Hougb is interested, in tbe question. Besid.es, be cannot be indifferent, for tbe oatb will not oblige bim to testify, that be did steal tbe grain, although it should be true — fot no man is obliged to criminate himself.