be borne in mind the proneness that people have to exaggerate statements respecting crimes of great magnitude; the almost impossibility of repeating the exact expressions of the party confessing; the probability that the words selected by the witness might have a different meaning to that which the prisoner intended to convey in his own statement; the likelihood of mistakes arising from defective memory; and the fact, that in the case of a confession not being made in the presence of a third party, the witness is not deterred from speaking falsely by any dread of the penalties awarded for the crime of perjury.

Statements made to a counsel, attorney, or solicitor, engaged in the trial, cannot be used as evidence in a court of justice; but they may be examined as to facts within their knowledge with which they have become acquainted, otherwise than from any confessions or admissions made by the accused to them in their professional capacity.

It is not necessary that a confession of a party accused should be made upon oath to authorize the Court in receiving it in evidence against him.

PRESUMPTIVE evidence means the relation of facts not precisely of the matter in issue, but of such a nature as may reasonably lead the jury to a correct elucidation of the acts and intentions of which the defendant stands charged.

Thus, if a man have a quarrel with another, and threatens his life, and shortly afterwards meets him in a wood and knocks his brains out with a stick, and it subsequently be proved that the stick in the possession of the defendant had marks of blood on it, and from the appearance of the wound it was probable that such a weapon had been used to inflict it; then, in the absence of satisfactory explanations on the part of the prisoner, a jury might reasonably infer that the deceased had met his death by the hand of the accused, and would, in all probability, convict a man on such evidence. Presumptive evidence should be admitted and considered in proportion to the difficulty of substantiating the facts in issue by direct evidence.

The disgusting crimes specified in the twenty

ninth article of war would generally be proved by circumstantial evidence; for the perpetrators would select such time and place for the committal of their atrocities as would render it almost impossible to prove the facts by direct evidence.

If goods be stolen and found within a reasonable time in the possession of a party not the rightful owner, it may be inferred that he was the person

who stole them.

"No person is to be required to explain or contradict until enough has been proved to warrant a reasonable conclusion against him in the absence of explanation or contradiction; but when such sufficient proof has been given, and the nature of the case is such as to admit of explanation or contradiction, human reason cannot do otherwise than adopt the conclusion to which the proof tends, if no explanation or contradiction is offered. *

There are several presumptions in law, viz. :1. A defendant is deemed innocent until the contrary be proved.

2. Every man contemplates the probable consequences of his acts, and is therefore responsible for them.

3. When an act is done injurious to an individual, malice is presumed in the person committing the act.

4. Killing is considered murder, until accident or necessity be proved by the defendant.

Sir Mathew Hale lays down two rules necessary * 2 Phillips, 436.

to be observed with regard to circumstantial evidence:

1st. Never to convict a man for stealing the goods of a person unknown, merely because he will give no account how he came by them, unless an actual felony be proved of such goods.

2nd. Never to convict any person of murder, or manslaughter, till at least the body be found, on account of two instances he mentions, when persons were executed for the murder of others who were then alive, although missing.*

* Archbold, 124.

E

CHAP. VI.

III. WRITTEN EVIDENCE.

Evidence. Written Evidence. Written Documents to be placed before the Court entire. - Written Evidence to be produced whenever it can be had. Acts of Parliament printed by the Queen's Printer allowed as Evidence. Prosecutor and Prisoner entitled to call on each other to produce documentary Evidence.

It is not competent in either party to extract a particular passage from any letter or writing to be used as evidence: the document must be placed before the Court entire. Papers written or signed by the prisoner may be used against him, and received in evidence as admissions on his part.

Whenever written evidence can be had to substantiate a fact, it must be produced, and oral evidence should not be allowed in lieu thereof. If it be necessary to examine a witness on a letter supposed to have been written by him, he must be asked whether it is in his handwriting, and if he acknowledge it, he cannot be questioned as to its contents; but the letter must be read and put in evidence; and the opposite party has a right to use it to frame his questions in the cross-examination. Copies of Acts of Parliament and the Articles of War, purporting to be printed by the Queen's