Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/92

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

IC • Castsrubdandadjudgedintho - `r78r. _ tru`! Apnl Term, r 78 1.. —-(:1 ` Rzsrunrcr mfr: M·Cnr·rr.*‘ HE defendant was indi&ed for I·Iigh·Treafon, in war, Src. hy joining the armies of the King of Great-. Britain. On the trial, the Attorney General olened to givetlaeeonfell- lionof the partyin evidenee made at the time of his arraigné DCM; but objeéted, that a eanfellion could only he admitted to he given in evidence by way of ecrrohoration, and that, therefore, an overt ac'} ihould he {irll: proved. F}. ro.. 24::. Brndfml, Attorney General, eontcnded, that the- oonfellion. proved by two witnelfes was of itfelffnlhcient; but that, inde- pendent ofthatpolition, it was not neeelfaryto prove the overt ac}, before the admiilionoi theeonfellion; andhe-referredto 5 Bac. Ah-. 152. Br was Courrr :—No cak of this kind has hitherto occur- redinthis Court. In thecafeoftheC•mmoo¤vuH o. Rvkrl:. _ (e.} Thedefendanfs confeEon¤•asoli`eredmerely to lhewyuo llIil|0b¢¢0I|I|¤iCt0d“C!!¢2h¤I‘Jl¢3&; andthe Court were there of opinion, that it ought to he admitted as eortoborativo proof. We {ind, indesl, that in B¢r¤i¢·L’.r r¢, Fg?. ro, two judges thought that a xmfelhon qfier tb: fail, proved by two witoelfes, was fulE·i·nt to convict, within the 7 HC 3 : But ’ jufliee Fgfer doubted the propriety of that opinion; as the itatute feerned to require two vritnedes to the overt aéls, or a eonfeliionin cpm Court. The ltatute of 7 W. 3. on which that diverlity of fenti-= ment amfe, does nor, however, extend to Pmryfluunia; but materially varies from our law on the fubjeft. `or inltance, the aét of Parliament requires two wimelfos to find the indi&· mult, as well as to provc the 0V€I’t a& upon the trial: But the a& of Aliembly refcribes nothing about the evidence to find the iudiélmentgwhicllimay,rhercfore,proceedeitherfrom nnewitnefs, or { This indiélment was tried at a Seiiion ofO_yer€s’ Tenniner, heid at Pluladrqzbia, in April l7Sl• As the judges were the fame who pre- iitled in the Supreme Court, it has not been thought necellary in aug Other way todiilinguilh the tribumll. _ (Gr) I DCIL Rf]!. 39• -