EVI 



KUL 



store to them money which they have 

 been obliged to pay ; the general princi- 

 ple now established is this, the question 

 in a criminal prosecution on personal act 

 being the same with that in a civil cause 

 in which the witnesses are interested, 

 goes generally to the credit, unless the 

 judgment, in the prosecution where they 

 are witnesses, can be given in evidence 

 in this cause wherein they are interested. 

 But though this is the general rule, an 

 exception to it seems to be established 

 in the case of forgery ; for many cases 

 have been decided, that a person, whose 

 hand writing has been forged to an in- 

 strument, whereby, if good, he would be 

 charged with a sum of money, or one who 

 has paid money, in consequence of such 

 forgery, cannot be a witness on the in- 

 dictment. 



When a witness is not liable to any 

 legal objection, he is first examined by 

 the counsel for the party on whose be- 

 half he comes to give evidence, which 

 is called his examination in chief, who 

 is not to put what are called leading 

 questions, viz. to form them in such a 

 way, as would instruct the witness in 

 the answers he is to give. He is then 

 cross-examined by the other side, when 

 leading questions are necessarily put; 

 and then he is re-examined as to what 

 he has been asked in his cross-examina- 

 tion. 



The party examined must depose those 

 facts only of which he has an immediate 

 knowledge and recollection; he may re- 

 fresh his memory with notes taken by him- 

 self at the time, and if he can then speak 

 positively as to his recollection, it is suffi- 

 cient; but if he have no recollection fur- 

 ther than finding the entry in his book, 

 the book itself must be produced. Deeds, 

 receipts, and writings requiring stamps, 

 must be stamped before they can be re- 

 ceived in evidence. 



Parole evidence shall not be admitted 

 to annul or substantially vary a written 

 instrument, nor to explain the meaning of 

 a testator in a will, though, where there 

 are two persons of the same name, and it 

 is doubtful which is the devisee from an 

 imperfect description, it must be proved 

 by witnesses which is the devisee. By 

 the statute of frauds, several things must 

 be evidenced by writing,which previous- 

 ly might be proved by parole only. See 

 FRAUDS. 



The general rule has been for the last 

 century, under the ablest judges, that no 

 man shall be asked a question, the answer 



to which might subject him to criminal 

 punishment or pecuniary penalty. It has 

 been lately attempted by some judges to 

 extend it further, to preventany question 

 being asked which may degrade a man's 

 character, which it is feared will deprive 

 the parties of all the substantial benefits 

 of cross-examination. By stat. 47 Ge/o- 

 III made on the spur of a particular oc- 

 casion, and to serve a party purpose on 

 the trial of Lord Melville, a witness can- 

 not object to answer a question, which 

 may by the answer render him liable to 

 an action at the suit of another party. 



EULER (LEONARD,) in biography, 

 one of the most extraordinary, and even 

 prodigious, mathematical geniuses that 

 the world ever produced. 'He was a na- 

 tive of Basil, and was born April 15, 

 1707. The years of his infancy were 

 passed at Richen, where his father was 

 minister. He was afterwards sent to the 

 university of Basil ; and as his memory 

 was prodigious and his application regu- 

 lar, he performed his academical tasks 

 with great rapidity ; and all the time that 

 he saved by this was consecrated to the 

 study of mathematics, which soon became 

 his favourite science. The early pro- 

 gress he made in this study added fresh 

 ardour to his application, by which, too, 

 he obtained a distinguished place in the 

 attention and esteem of Professor John 

 Bernoulli, who was then one of the chief 

 mathematicians in Europe. 



In 1723, M. Euler took his degree as 

 master of arts, and delivered on that oc- 

 casion a Latin discourse, in which he 

 drew a comparison between the philoso- 

 phy of Newton and the Cartesian system, 

 which was received with the greatest ap- 

 plause. At his father's desire he next 

 applied himself to the study of theology 

 and the oriental languages; and though 

 these studies were foreign to his predo- 

 minant propensity, his success was con- 

 siderable even in this line. However, 

 with his father's consent, he afterwards 

 returned to mathematics as his principal 

 object. In continuing to avail himself of 

 the councils and instructions of M. Ber- 

 noulli, he contracted an intimate friend- 

 ship with his two sons, Nicholas and 

 Daniel; and it was chiefly in consequence 

 of these connections, that he afterwards 

 became the principal ornament of the phi- 

 losophical world. 



The project of erecting an academy at 

 Petersburgh, which had been formed by 

 Peter the Great, was executed by Ca- 

 tharine the First : and the two young 



