to attend. It may be taken before a magistrate or commissioner, duly authorized.

The

6. The object of the examination of a witness is to elicit the truth from him. On the suggestion of either party, the court may order that the witnesses be examined separate and apart from each other. When a witness has been sworn, he is first examined by the party producing him. This examination is called the direct examination. He may then be examined by the opposite party. This examination is called the cross-examination. examination is conducted orally, in open court, under the regulation of the judge, in the presence of the jury, the parties, and their counsel. Leading questions are not allowed to be put on the direct examination. Leading questions are such as suggest to the witness the answer desired, and such as may be answered by Yes or No. The witness is to be examined in reference to matters of fact within his own knowledge. There are some cases in which leading questions may be asked on the direct examination:

(1.) Where the witness appears to be hostile to the party producing him.

(2.) Where he is in the interest of the other party. (3.) Where he is unwilling to give evidence.

(4.) Where an omission in the evidence is caused by want of recollection.

A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory by the use of a written instrument, memorandum, or entry in a book. A witness is allowed to express his opinion. or belief, when he testifies to the identity of a person or to the handwriting.

6. What is the object of the examination of a witness? On the suggestion of either party, what may the court do? When a witness has been sworn, by whom is he first examined? What is this examination called? By whom is he then examined? What is this examination called? How is the examination conducted? Under whose regulation? In whose presence? What questions are not allowed to be put on the direct examination? What are leading questions? In reference to what is the witness to be examined? In what cases may leading ques

7. A witness is not compelled to answer a question, when the answer will have a tendency to expose him to any criminal charge or penalty, or to any forfeiture of estate. The court will not prevent a witness from answering, if he chooses. If, after being notified of his rights, he chooses to answer, he will be bound to answer all other questions put to him relative to the same transaction. If the witness declines to answer, no inference of the truth of the fact is permitted to be drawn from that circum

stance.

8. After a witness has been examined in chief, his direct examination being closed, his credit may be impeached

(1.) By disproving the statements of the witness.

(2.) By introducing evidence affecting his character for truth and veracity.

In impeaching the character of the witness, the examination must be confined to his general reputation. The impeaching witness should be asked if he knows the general reputation of the witness to be impeached, among his neighbors. If he answer in the affirmative, he is asked, "Is it good or bad?" If he answer, "It is bad,” he is then asked, "From what you know of his general reputation, would you believe him under oath?" In answer to such evidence, the other party may cross-examine the impeaching witnesses as to the persons he has heard speak of the impeached witness; and they may also impeach the impeaching witnesses, and support the character of their own witness by fresh evidence. A witness may also be

tions be put on the direct examination? How may a witness be allowed to refresh his memory? When may a witness express his opinion?

7. When is a witness not compelled to answer? Will the court prevent the witness from answering? If, after being notified of his rights, he chooses to answer? If the witness decline to answer?

8. After a witness has been examined in chief, how may his credit be impeached? In impeaching the character of the witness, to what must the examination be confined? What should the impeaching witness be asked? If he answer in the affirmative, what is the second question? If he answer in the affirmative, what is the third question? What may the other party then do?

impeached by proving that he has made statements out of court contrary to his evidence in court.

CHAPTER CIX.

WRITTEN EVIDENCE.

1. THE courts will recognize, without other proof than inspection

(1.) The national and State seals, and the seals of foreign States which have been recognized by our government. (2.) The seals of foreign courts of admiralty.

(3.) Seals of notaries public.

(4.) Public statutes.

Respecting public statutes, reference is had to a copy from the legislative rolls, or to the book printed by public authority. Acts of a State may be proved by producing a copy printed by authority of the government. Procla mations and other acts of the executive are proved by producing the government paper in which they were authorized to be printed. The evidence that a particular person has been recognized as a foreign minister is the certificate of the secretary of state. Those books are recognized by law which the law requires to be kept.

2. The statute laws of a sister State are proved by producing the printed volume printed by the authority of the State. The proof of a record is made by producing the record, or a certified copy thereof. The judgment of inferior courts is usually proved by producing the record.

1. What will the courts recognize without other proof than inspec tion? Respecting public statutes, to what is reference had? How may acts of State be proved? How are proclamations and other acts of the executive proved? What is the evidence that a particular person has been recognized as a foreign minister? What books are recognized by law?

2. How are the statute laws of a sister State proved? How is the proof of a record made? How is the judgment of an inferior court

Marriages are to be governed by the law of the place where they are celebrated. If valid there, thev are valid everywhere. There are some exceptions

(1.) Those involving polygamy and incest.

(2.) Those prohibited by public law of the country, from motives of policy.

(3.) Those celebrated in foreign countries, between parties entitled to the benefit of the laws of their own country.

When private writings are produced in evidence, they must be proved to be genuine. If, on production of an instrument in writing, it appears to have been altered, it is incumbent on the party offering it to explain the alterations. Every alteration on the face of a written instrument detracts from its credit and renders it suspicious. The party claiming under it is ordinarily bound to remove this suspicion. If the alteration is noted in the attestation clause as having been made before its execution, it is sufficient to relieve it from suspicion. If any ground of suspicion is apparent on the face of the intrument, the law leaves the question of the time when it was done, as well as the person by whom it was done, and the intent with which it was done, as matters of fact to be found by the jury, upon proof to be adduced by the party offering the instrument in evidence. An instrument derives its legal virtue from its being the sole depository of the agreement of the parties, solemnly adopted as such, and attested by the signature of the party engaging to perform it.

3. A material alteration is one which causes the instrument to speak a language different in legal effect from the

proved? By what law are marriages governed? What are the exceptions? When private writings are produced? If an instrument appears to be altered? What is the effect of an alteration? Who is bound to remove the suspicion? If the alteration is noted in the attestation clause? If any grounds of suspicion are apparent upon the face of the instrument, to whom is the questions involved referred? From what does an instrument derive its legal virtue?

3. What is a material alteration? When does an alteration render the

original. If an alteration be fraudulent, whether material or immaterial, the instrument is void, if made by the party claiming under it. If the alterations are made by the consent of both parties, the instrument is valid. When an instrument is produced in court, it must be proved by the subscribing witness, except

(1.) When the instrument is more than thirty years old. (2.) When it is produced by the adverse party pursuant to notice, the party producing it claiming an interest under it.

(3.) When the subscribing witness cannot be found.

If there be more than one subscribing witness, the absence of all must be satisfactorily accounted for, in order to let in secondary evidence.

CHAPTER CX.

HEARSAY EVIDENCE.

1. THE most satisfactory evidence is that which is afforded by our own senses. When this cannot be had, the law requires the evidence of those who can speak from their own personal knowledge. It is not necessary that the witness in all cases have personal knowledge of the main fact in the controversy. This may not be provable from direct evidence, but by inference from other facts shown to exist. The witness must be confined to facts. lying within his own knowledge, whether of things said or done. He cannot testify from information given by

instrument void? If made by the consent of both parties? How must an instrument in writing be proved? When may it be proved without the evidence of the subscribing witness? If there are more than one subscribing witness?

1. What is the most satisfactory evidence? When this cannot be had, what does the law require? What is not necessary for the witness to know in all cases? Is this always provable from direct evidence? To what must the witness be confined? From what can he not testify? To