From Transcribe Wiki
Revision as of 11:03, 25 May 2019 by Scripto (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

granted a new trial - This event will not put the deft. in a worse situation, than he would have been in if the cause had remained at law altogether - It seems to have been the object of the pltfs counsel to spread the evidence on record, to enable this court to decide for itself, whether the evidence supported the verdict - I will remark, that taking the evidence as it appears here, the Court I should think would not hesitate much in concurring with the judge before whom the case was tried - But there is a very strong objection to this mode of certifying the evidence - Much oral evidence was examined - and this Oral evidence as it will be clearly seen was not reduced to writing as it was delivered by the witnesses, and is not put in the words of the witnesses - Now I do not admit the authority of the judge to commit to record from his memory, oral evidence delivered on the trial - Much less do I admit the right of any other person, or the right to call in the witnesses again - But if he had, yet it will be impossible for this court to judge as well from the summary here given as the judge could who heard the witnesses, and who inspected the written exhibits -

C [Ichmons?], for Deft 3. Apl. 1813