7 Apr. 1803

Evidence

Pre-exhibited

The /As to these/ considerations on which in point of reason in these cases the exclusion has been grounded, they appear to be as follows -

1. The questions by which the prior evidence was drawn forth - the questions of the answers to which it is composed - not chosen, any of them, by the party against whom the evidence is now attempted /proposed/ to be produced. Therefore whatever truth may be contained in that mass of evidence, it is not the whole truth - but only a part of the truth: and such part the tendency of which will naturally be exclusively favourable to the party by whose questions it was called forth and by whom the production of it is now proposed: unfavourable therefore to the party by whom the production of it is now opposed. Ground of the objection in one word - partiality. Short reason - The evidence partial, being drawn forth by questions, put only on one side.

2. No opportunity of cross-examination possessed by the party by whom on that account the production of it is now opposed. Therefore no opportunity /power/ of applying this most powerful of all tests to the deparation of this already partial evidence. Ground of the objection in one word - want of scrutiny. Short reason: The evidence unscrutinized.

3. In case of misstatement - whether through unintentional correctness or mendacity - no opportunity /power/ on the part /side/ of the party now prejudiced by it, to encounter it by opposite evidence, supposing such opposite evidence to be in existence. Ground of the objection briefly expressed - no opportunity of contradiction: the evidence uncontradictable.

4. Danger of collusion in the post[?] individual instance - facility given to collusion in future instances - should evidence thus circumstanced be admitted /deemed admissible/.