ADVERTISEMENT OF THE AMERICAN EDITOR. THE design of the editor was, principally, to collect the decisions of the different courts in the United States, connected with the subject of the following work, the undoubted merit of which, justly entities it to a prefer ence to all former treatises on the law of evidence. The exuberance of the subject itself, and a solicitude to insert every thing which could be deemed useful, have swelled the notes greatly beyond what was originally expectcd and intended; and yet the learned reader will perceive that they might have been made stil! more extensive; that much has been omitted by design, and much, no doubt, through inadvertence. All the American works of celebrity and merit have been carefully consulted, and though some others, of a contrary description, have been entirely neglected, yet it may not be improper to apologize for a number of references to loose and obscure reporters. A few additional English authorities have been collected, and in two or three instances it has been attempted to supply, however imperfectly, some omissions of the author-omissions arising not from ignorance or carelessness, but from bis desire. to compress the work; and it is not unlikely that, upon careful examination, what might at first sight have appeared an omission, would be found to be no other than a necessary deduction from some principle which had been before fully stated. The editor submits his labours, such as they are, to the candour of the profession, and if they should be thought undeserving of approbation, he has at least this consolation, that they cannot detract from the merit of the original work. ADVERTISEMENT TO THE THIRD EDITION. In the present Edition of the Treatise on Evidence, the Author has introduced several additions, which, he hopes, will be thought to render the Work more complete.The most important of these is a section, in the eighth Chapter of the Second Part, on the subject of Written Agreements, with reference to the Statute of Frauds.This branch of law has been ably treated by other writers; but as it falls within the scope and design of the following Treatise, and is of almost daily occurrence in practice, the Author conceived that it would not be superfluous to give a compendious view of a subject of such general importance. It was his intention also to have added a Chapter on the evidence requisite to support particular Issues, in the several forms of action; but various engagements have prevented him for the present from completing this design. Many cases, reported since the last Edition, have been here inserted; and the author is much indebted to Mr. Maule and Mr. Selwyn, for their kindness in supplying him with their manuscript notes of other decisions, which have not yet appeared in print. The same acknowledgments are due to Mr. Price for communicating his manuscript note in the case of Bullen v. Michel. As the present Edition was sent to the press before the late trial at bar for High Treason, there was no opportunity of adverting to some discussions on points of evidence, which occurred on that occasion. It may there fore be proper to mention in this place, that one of the rules stated in the Chapter on the Examination of Witnesses*, was then discussed at some length. The rule referred to is, "that if a witness, on being questioned (for the purpose of discrediting him), whether he has not been guilty of felony, deny the charge, the party, against whom the witness has been called, will not be allowed to prove the charge." This rule of evidence was considered and settled on the trials of Rookwood and Layer, which were also cases of High Treason; and it is now completely established as a principle, on the authority of all the Judges, who presided at the late State Trial. * P. 229, 230. MIDDLE TEMPLE, PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. IN offering to the public the following Treatise on a subject, which has already been considered by writers of experience and ability, the author fears that he may be thought presumptuous. He trusts, however, that he will be forgiven, when it is recollected, that the subject, although it has excited so much attention, is yet one which is not easily exhausted, and with regard to which the practice of every day must constantly supply fresh materials for observation. Among the works on the law of evidence, the one most generally approved is that of Mr. PEAKE; and the present writer feels himself gratified in this opportunity of acknowledging its merits. The author regrets, that he is unable to add more cases to those already published. The notes of the case of Brown v. Fox, of the Berkeley-Peerage case, and of Wiltzie v. Adamson, have been supplied by the kindness of friends; and for the manuscript notes of the following cases, R. v. Tucker, R. v. Croker, R. v. Cole, and R. v. Hodgson, he is indebted to an authority, on which the reader may entirely rely. The reported cases, which are cited, are numerous; but none are mentioned, which have not been carefully examined. Since the former part of this work has been printed, several cases connected with the subject have been reported; they did not, however, appear of sufficient importance to be added in an appendix. With respect to a passage in the third chapter, on the incompetency of witnesses who have been excommunicated, it will be proper to observe, that in consequence of a late act of parliament, which abolishes the sentence of excommunication for contempt, no disability of this kind can any longer exist. * The following pages are submitted to the public, with much diffidence and anxiety. The author feels, that many imperfections will be observed; and some, which, perhaps, more experience might have enabled him to avoid. He is conscious, however, that he has used every endeavour to render his work not unworthy of the public eye, and that he has devoted to it his time and utmost attention. MIDDLE TEMPLE, June 14, 1814. *Stat 53 G. 3. c. 127 |