116 
D. P. YONKERMAN. 
I 
1 - 
self perfectly clear on all dates and times. Where measurements, 
size, color, weight, etc., are matters of evidence, these should be 
carefully considered beforehand ; sometimes an illustrative draw¬ 
ing is of great service in evidence. Thus, in describing cuts, 
stabs, bruises, enlarged joints, deformities, etc., a sketch of the 
injured part, showing the precise direction of a wound, at once 
renders the whole thing clear to the judge and jury, while simple 
description might fail. But though the drawing may be rough, 
remember it must be correct, or it is worse than useless. 
Again, as an expeit you will be called upon for opinions. The 
conclusions you would draw from the facts proved, demand your 
most careful consideration. The medico-legal opinion of any 
value, is the thoughtful, ofttimes tedious work of study and ex¬ 
amination ; and if in the quiet of your study you fail to come to 
any conclusions, do not attempt a wild conjecture in the hurry 
and excitement of the witness-box. To be accurate is ten thous¬ 
and times better than to appear brilliant. Want of thought 
(laziness, in fact,) is a far worse crime than an error of judg¬ 
ment. 
Before giving evidence, carefully distinguish between facts 
and opinions. That prussic acid and belladonna are deadly poi¬ 
sons are facts, but their precise method of action are matters of 
opinion. Tn giving evidence, use at all times when possible plain 
English. “ A blood clot ” is a better witness-box phrase than 
“ an apoplectic extravasation.” Speak of a bruise, rather than a 
contusion; of the belly, rather than the abdomen. Avoid exag¬ 
gerated expressions. 
In cross-examination never lose your temper; your best de¬ 
fence, if unfairly pressed, is perfect coolness. The honest wit¬ 
ness can afford to be dignified. If you are asked a question that 
you cannot answer, at once admit it, with a plain, outspoken “I 
don’t know.” Nothing is more dangerous than for a witness to 
attempt to guess, for fear of being thought ignorant; for a man¬ 
ufactured answer suggests further questions, until at last the wit¬ 
ness finds himself in a maze from which extrication is well-nigh 
hopeless. 
But having once replied “I don’t know” to a question, never 
