according to the circumstances under which they are made.  Voluntary, deliberate confessions are the most important and satisfactory evidence, but confessions hastily made, or improperly obtained, are entitled to little or no consideration.  It is always to be inquired, whether they were purely voluntary, or were made under any undue influence of hope or fear; for, in general, if any influence were exerted on the mind of the person confessing, such confessions are not to be submitted to a jury.

Who is Mr. Colman?  He is an intelligent, accurate, and cautious witness; a gentleman of high and well-known character, and of unquestionable veracity; as a clergyman, highly respectable; as a man, of fair name and fame.

Why was Mr. Colman with the prisoner?  Joseph J. Knapp was his parishioner; he was the head of a family, and had been married by Mr. Colman.  The interests of that family were dear to him.  He felt for their afflictions, and was anxious to alleviate their sufferings.  He went from the purest and best of motives to visit Joseph Knapp.  He came to save, not to destroy; to rescue, not to take away life.  In this family he thought there might be a chance to save one.  It is a misconstruction of Mr. Colman’s motives, at once the most strange and the most uncharitable, a perversion of all just views of his conduct and intentions the most unaccountable, to represent him as acting, on this occasion, in hostility to any one, or as desirous of injuring or endangering any one.  He has stated his own motives, and his own conduct, in a manner to command universal belief and universal respect.  For intelligence, for consistency, for accuracy, for caution, for candor, never did witness acquit himself better, or stand fairer.  In all that he did as a man, and all he has said as a witness, he has shown himself worthy of entire regard.

Now, Gentlemen, very important confessions made by the prisoner are sworn to by Mr. Colman.  They were made in the prisoner’s cell, where Mr. Colman had gone with the prisoner’s brother, N. Phippen Knapp.  Whatever conversation took place was in the presence of N.P.  Knapp.  Now, on the part of the prisoner, two things are asserted; first, that such inducements were suggested to the prisoner, in this interview, that no confessions made by him ought to be received; second, that, in point of fact, he made no such confessions as Mr. Colman testifies to, nor, indeed, any confessions at all.  These two propositions are attempted to be supported by the testimony of N.P.  Knapp.  These two witnesses, Mr. Colman and N.P.  Knapp, differ entirely.  There is no possibility of reconciling them.  No charity can cover both.  One or the other has sworn falsely.  If N.P.  Knapp be believed, Mr. Colman’s testimony must be wholly disregarded.  It is, then, a question of credit, a question of belief between the two witnesses.  As you decide between these, so you will decide on all this part of the case.