The crime is difficult to prove, being usually
committed in secret. Answer. But circumstantial proof will do; for
example, marks of violence, the behavior, countenance, &c. of the
prisoner, &c. And if conclusive proof be difficult to be obtained,
shall we therefore fasten irremovably upon equivocal proof? Can we
change the nature of what is contestable, and make it incontestable?
Can we make that conclusive which God and nature have made
inconclusive? Solon made no law against parricide, supposing it
impossible that any one could be guilty of it; and the Persians, from
the same opinion, adjudged all who killed their reputed parents to be
bastards; and although parental be yet stronger than filial
affection, we admit saticide proved on the most equivocal testimony,
whilst they rejected all proof of an act certainly not more repugnant
to nature, as of a thing impossible, unprovable. See Beccaria, 31.
(* 8) 25. G. 2. c. 37.
(* 9) Quaere, if the estates of both parties in a duel, should
not be forfeited? The deceased is equally guilty with a suicide.
(* 10) Quaere, if these words may not be omitted? By the
Common law, one witness in treason was sufficient. Foster 233. Plowd.
8. a. Mirror c. 3. 34. Waterhouse on Fortesc.
Pages:
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47