8 Nov 1803

Evidence

Circumstantial

in general

Continuation

Another thing is that the greater the number of /is of the/ distinct facts that come to be deposed to, the greater the probability of different deposing witnesses, and the greater the probability that among them there will be some one or more whose relative situation would place him out of the reach of those causes of suspicion that will be apt to attach upon the witness to whose lot it falls to speak to the principal fact. In the case of injuries to individuals, to /To/ the principal fact the sort of deposing witness most sure to be met with is either the party injured, or some person connected by self-regarding interest or sympathy with the party injured: for example the party beaten, insulted, plundered, cheated: while among the infinitely diversified chain of evidentiary facts it will frequently perhaps frequently happen that there shall be one or more that have fallen under the cognizance of perfect strangers: the preparations, the declarations of intention, the threats, the consultations among the accomplices, the journeys to and from the spot, the clandestinity[?] of deportment, the confusion of mind, the silence in cases where innocence would have given birth to explanations for the purpose of doing[?] away suspicions suggested by observing eyes to enquiring lips - facts of this sort are liable to have found a variety of witnesses, many of them standing altogether clear of those suspicions of bias or mendacity which, as already observed, are so apt to attach upon the sort of witnesses to whom the perception /cognizance/ of the principal facts is so apt to have been confined.