Activate Javascript or update your browser for the full Digital Library experience.
Previous Page
–
Next Page
Full Title
The trials of William S. Smith, and Samuel G. Ogden, for misdemeanours, had in the circuit court of the United States for the New-York District, in July, 1806.
Author
Lloyd, Thomas, 1756-1827.
Date Added
11 January 2014
Language
English
Publish Date
1807
Publisher
New York: I. Riley and Co.
Source
ACHS Historic Papers Lloyd Family.
Topic
Smith, William Stephens, > 1755-1816 > Trials, litigation, etc. Ogden, Samuel G. > (Samuel Gouverneur), > 1779-1860 > Trials, litigation, etc. Venezuela > History > Miranda's Expedition, 1806. United States > Foreign relations > Spain. Spain > Foreign relations > United States.
About
More Details Permanent Link
Disclaimers
Disclaimer of Liability Disclaimer of Endorsement
OCR
96 THE TRIAL OF ~
"Hoffman. To answer. such questions as would tend to criminate
himself will not be required by the court. By this mode they can-
not expect to criminate Col. Smith. Mr. Ogden is now required
to show. the destination of the Leander, without which they will
edefeated-in establishing the counts in the indictment ; with it,
they may, perhaps, be enabled to bring sufficient testimony to es-
tablish their charge. : So OR
- Ogden. If you ask. this as a particular question, I decline to an-
swer. If you put it as a general question, I answer, yes. 7°
Court. It appears a proper question. "You must say if you
know any thing of a conversation or declaration of Mr. Smith,
made relative to the matters charged in the indictment. ©
sected to show that the witness is not obliged to answer questions
like that now proposed; he cannot be compclled to give testlinoe .
ny as to confessions or conversations of the defendant, which may
be. made use of against the witness when it comes to his turn to”
be a defendant, and which will tend to criminate him.
thing ‘as to his agency or procuration of this expedition. It is
proper he should give testimony on that pomt.
Colden. I hope this is not a positive decision of the court, but
‘that they. will hear.us on so important a point. The court is now
46 make a decision of the utmost consequence, not only to this
defendant and to the witness, but to every citizen, inasmuch as
itinvolves a fundamental principle in the administration of justice.
_A witness is not bound to give testimony which may tend to
criminate himself ; the witness ought not to be called upon to
give the testimony required of him, because it may tend to crimi-
nate himself. '. And that it may do so, will be obvious to the court
svhen it turns to its records, and sees that there is an indictment
on its files against the witness for the same offences with which
- the def endant is,charged.. Sait pont a
Edwards said, that the question might be well understood, he
- would put it ina new form: Did you ever hear Col. Smith
speak of the expedition of the Leander to South America; and
_ what did he say ? | .
Colden. This mode of putting the question by no means re-
moves our objections. We contend, not only that a witness shall”
not be compelled to answer a question, when. the answer: may
criminate him immediately, but that he shall not be compelled to
answer a question which may end to criminate himself. oy
“Court. You must show how this tends to criminate Mr. Ogden.
Colden. Nothing can be more obvious than that it may do so.
If Mr. Ogden were not indicted for having participated in the of.
_ fence, with which the defendant is charged,. still, inasmuch as
-he would be liable to. be indicted at any time hereafter, if it
should appear that he was a frartice/ts criminis, he might object
\
}
Colden hoped the court would hear him on this point 5 be ex-
.. Court. the question is, if the witness heard Col. Smith say any. .
}
i
j
|
: