“3dly.  Because the prisoners who may hereafter have the misfortune to stand at our bar will be deprived of that consolation which the Lord High Steward Nottingham conveyed to the prisoner, Lord Cornwallis, viz., ’That the Lords have that tender regard of a prisoner at the bar, that they will not suffer a case to be put in his absence, lest it should prejudice him by being wrong stated.’

“4thly.  Because unusual mystery and secrecy in our judicial proceedings must tend either to discredit the acquittal of the prisoner, or render the justice of his condemnation doubtful.

“PORCHESTER.  SUFFOLK AND BERKSHIRE.  LOUGHBOROUGH.”

[32] See the Lord High Steward’s speech on that head, 1st James II.

[33] All the resolutions of the Judges, to the time of the reference to the Committee, are in the Appendix, No. 2.

[34] Atkyns, Vol.  I. p. 445.

[35] Blackstone’s Commentaries, Book IV. p. 258.

[36] Lords’ Journals, Vol.  IV. p. 204.  An. 1641.  Rush.  Trial of Lord Strafford, p. 430.

[37] Lords’ Journals, Vol.  IV. p. 210.

[38] Id.  Vol.  XXII. p. 536 to 546.  An. 1725.

[39] Lords’ Journals, Vol.  XXII. p. 541.

[40] Id.  Vol.  XXVII. p. 63, 65.  An. 1746

[41] Gilbert’s Law of Evidence, p. 23.

[42] Gravina, 84, 85.

[43] Id. 90 usque ad 100.

[44] Atkyns, Rep.  Vol.  I p. 37, Omichund versus Barker.

[45] Digest.  Lib.  XXII.  Tit. 5.

[46] Calvinus, voce Praesumptio.

[47] Bartolus

[48] Lib.  II.  Obs. 149, Sec. 9.

[49] Lib.  I. Obs. 91, Sec. 7.

[50] Antiqua jurisprudentia aspera quidem illa, tenebricosa, et tristis, non tam in aequitate quam in verborum superstitione fundata, eaque Ciceronis aetatem fere attigit, mansitque annos circiter CCCL.  Quae hanc excepit, viguitque annos fere septuaginta novem, superiori longe humanior; quippe quae magis utilitate communi, quam potestate verborum, negotia moderaretur.—­Gravina, p. 86.

[51] Omichund v. Barker, Atk.  I.

[52] Gaill, Lib.  II.  Obs. 20, Sec. 5.

[53] N.B.—­In some criminal cases also, though not of treason, husband is admitted to prove an assault upon his wife, for the King, ruled by Raymond, Chief-Justice, Trin. 11th Geo., King v. Azire.  And for various other exceptions see Buller’s Nisi Prius, 286, 287.

[54] Cro.  Charl. 365.

[55] Omichund v. Barker, 1st Atkyns, ut supra.

[56] Rex v. Philips, Burrow, Vol.  I. p. 301, 302, 304.

[57] Mayor of Hull v. Horner, Cowper’s Reports, 109.

[58] Abrahams v. Bunn, Burrow, Vol.  IV. p. 2254.  The whole case well worth reading.

[59] Wyndham v. Chetwynd, Burrow, Vol.  I. p. 421.

[60] King v. Bray.

[61] Wyndham v. Chetwynd.