Georgia Reports Volume 71 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1885 edition. Excerpt: ... wounded man by directly leading questions, suggesting the answer desired by the questioner, and responded to by a monosyllable, yes or no. This we say from the evident reluctance of 1 he witness to give the words of the conversation, when pressed so to do, and from his forgetfulness of particulars. It seems difiicult, if not impossible to determine the part that each took in this conversation; or whether this account was made up from the witness's inferences from the conversation or from what was actually said. This affords a very slender foundation for the admission of such testimony. The answers given were fragmentary, and the capacity of the party to make the statement, -to say the least, was questionable. It is hardly conceivable that if his physical condition had admitted. he cou1d, from mental inability, have stood an examination conducted in the most cautious and considerate manner upon the stand. His incompetency as a witness, from mental debility, scarcely admits of a doubt. The safer course would have been to exclude these answers thus elicited as dying declarations. The Supreme Court of Vermont, State vs. Center et al., 35 Verm. R., 378, 386, thus laid down the law upon this subject: "The rule that dying declarations should point distinctly to the cause of death and the circumstances producing and attending 1t, is one that should not be relaxed. Declarations, at the best, are uncertain evidence, liable to be misunderstood, imperfectly remembered, and incorrectly related. As to dying declarations there can be no crossexamination. The condition of the declarant, in his extremity, is often unfavorable to clear recollection, and to the giving of a full and complete account of all the particulars which it might be...