FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   >>  
itical arguments are infinitely stronger, the crime relating, and in the most eminent degree relating, to the public. One case has happened since the time which is limited by the order of the House for this Report: it is so very important, that we think ourselves justified in submitting it to the House without delay. Your Committee, on the supposed rules here alluded to, has been prevented (as of right) from examining a witness of importance in the case, and one on whose supposed knowledge of his most hidden transactions the prisoner had himself, in all stages of this business, as the House well knows, endeavored to raise presumptions in favor of his cause. Indeed, it was his principal, if not only justification, as to the _intention_, in many different acts of corruption charged upon him. The witness to whom we allude is Mr. Larkins. This witness came from India after your Committee had closed the evidence of this House in chief, and could not be produced before the time of the reply. Your Committee was not suffered to examine him,--not, as they could find, on objections to the particular question as improper, but upon some or other of the general grounds (as they believe) on which Mr. Hastings resisted any evidence from him. The party, after having resisted his production, on the next sitting day admitted him, and by consent he was examined. Your Committee entered a protest on the minutes in favor of their right. Your Committee contended, and do contend, that, by the Law of Parliament, whilst the trial lasts, they have full right to call new evidence, as the circumstances may afford and the posture of the cause may demand it. This right seems to have been asserted by the Managers for the Commons in the case of Lord Stafford, 32 Charles II.[77] The Managers in that case claimed it as the right of the Commons to produce witnesses for the purpose of fortifying their former evidence. Their claim was admitted by the court. It is an adjudged case in the Law of Parliament. Your Committee is well aware that the notorious perjury and infamy of the witnesses in the trial of Lord Stafford has been used to throw a shade of doubt and suspicion on all that was transacted on that occasion. But there is no force in such an objection. Your Committee has no concern in the defence of these witnesses, nor of the Lords who found their verdict on such testimony, nor of the morality of those who produced it. Much may be said to palliate
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   >>  



Top keywords:

Committee

 

evidence

 

witness

 

witnesses

 

Stafford

 
Managers
 

Commons

 

produced

 

resisted

 
admitted

relating

 
Parliament
 

supposed

 

asserted

 

whilst

 

sitting

 

consent

 

examined

 

demand

 

posture


circumstances

 

contended

 

minutes

 

entered

 

afford

 

protest

 

contend

 

objection

 

concern

 

defence


suspicion

 
transacted
 

occasion

 

palliate

 

morality

 
verdict
 

testimony

 

purpose

 

fortifying

 

produce


claimed

 

Charles

 

infamy

 

perjury

 

notorious

 

production

 
adjudged
 

alluded

 

prevented

 

examining