Reading Time: 2 minutes [325 words]

JAMES THOMPSON CALLENDER. 859

granting you a writ of error in the Supreme Court. It is on
these grounds that I reject the evidence of the gentleman.
The very argument assigned by the young gentleman who
spoke last, has convinced my mind that I am right. The of-
fered testimony has no direct and proper application to the
issue; it would deceive and mislead the jury; an argumenta-
tive justification of a trivial, unimportant part of a libel,
would be urged before a jury as a substantial vindication of
the whole. You would, by misleading the jury under such
legal testimony destroy public treaties and public faith;
and nothing would be more uncertain than law, were such an
legal excuse admitted in courts of law.

Mr. Nicholas suggested that it might be proper to prove
one part of a specific charge by one witness, and another part
‘by another, and thereby prove the charge.

Jupar Case said that the very argument suggested by
the young gentleman who spoke last, convinced his mind that
it would be improper to admit the testimony now offered to
the court; that to admit evidence, which went to an arga-
mentative establishment of the truth of a minute part of the
charge by one witness, and another minute part by another
witness, would be irregular, and subversive of every prin-
ciple of law; that it had no relation to the iesne; that it waa
a popular argument, calculated to deceive the people, but
very incorrect.

Jupcz Gaur declared that ke conenrred with his brother
judge.

Jvupes Crase. This is a new doctrine, inenleated in Vir-
ginia. You have all along mistaken the law, and press your
mistakes on the court. The United States must prove the
publication, and the fallacy of it. When these things are
done, you must prove a justification, and this justification
tust be entire and complete, as to any one specific charge; 8
partial justification is inadmissible. T am happy to find that
my brother Judge Griffin eoneurs with me in opinion.

Mr. Hay. The question before the court is, whether this
evidence goes to prove the truth of the whole charge? The

Related Posts