have taken under the will, in the said freehold tenements, estates for life; with cross-remainders between them for life, in the event of one or two of them dying without lawful issue. 5thly, That the said G. B. would now have an estate in tail in remainder in his mother's one undivided third part of the said freehold tenements, subject to be divested in part by the birth of other children of his mother, whether sons or daughters; and that he would have an estate in tail in the whole of the said freehold tenements, in the event of his being the only issue of the three nieces living at the death of the survivor of them, no other issue having been born. Murthwaite v. Barnard. Page 623 4. Devise of land to devisor's granddaughter, A. M., for life; remainder to trustees, during the life of A. M., to support contingent remainders; remainder to all and every the children in tail, with cross-remainders between them in tail; and, in default of issue of all and every the children of the grand-daughter, to devisor's daughter, B. C. M., for life; remainder to such one or more of the children of B. C. M. as B. C. M., by deed or will attested by three witnesses, should appoint for their lives; remainder to all and every the child and children of such daughter or daughters, to be appointed by B. C. M., as aforesaid; and if only VOL. II. one should be appointed, to her and the heirs of her body; and if more than one should be appointed, all of them to take their mother's shares, per stirpes, as tenants in common, and not as joint-tenants; with cross-remainders between them, the children of such daughters, as to their mother's shares in tail; and on failure of such issue of any one or more of such daughters, with cross-remainders to the others of their issue; and, in default of appointment, and of any appointment not exhausting the whole fee, the land, or so much as should not be exhausted by appointment, to B. C. M. for life; remainder to all her daughters for their lives, with cross-remainders for life between them; remainder, during the lives of the daughters of B. C. M. and the survivor, to support contingent remainders; and, for default of issue of any or either of the daughters of B. C. M., to B. C. M. and her heirs. A. M. died, sole and intestate, leaving B. C. M. her heir at law, and heir at law of devisor. B. C. M. has nine daughters, many of whom are married and have issue: Held, 1st. That B. C. M. has in the lands an estate for life, with an ultimate reversion to herself in fee. 2dly. That, in default of appointment, the daughters now living of B. C. M. have, respectively, in the lands estates for life in remainder, as tenants in common, with crossremainders amongst themselves for life; 3 D to it, takes the oath in the usual form, he may be afterwards asked, whether he thinks the oath binding upon his conscience; but it is unnecessary and irrelevant to ask him, if he considers any other form of oath more binding, and such question cannot be asked. The Queen's case. Page 284 5. It is not allowable, on cross-examination, in the statement of a question to a witness, to represent the contents of a letter, and to ask the witness whether he wrote a letter to any person with such contents, or contents to the like effect, without having first shewn the witness the letter, and having asked him whether he wrote that letter. Ibid. 286 6. Two or three lines of a letter may be exhibited to a witness, without exhibiting to him the whole, and the witness may be asked whether he wrote the part exhibited. Ibid. But, if the witness deny that he wrote such part, he cannot be examined as to the contents of the letter. Ibid. 7. If, on cross-examination, a witness admits a letter to be of his handwriting, he cannot be questioned by counsel whether statements, such as the counsel may suggest, are contained in it, but the whole letter must be read in evidence. In the ordinary course of proceeding, such letter must be read, as part of the cross-examining counsel's case. The Court, however, may permit it to be read at an earlier period, if the counsel suggest that he wishes to have the letter immediately read, in order to found certain questions upon it, considering it, however, as part the evidence of the counsel proposing such a course, and subject to the consequences thereof. The Queen's case. Page 288 8. If, on cross-examination, it is proposed to ascertain of a witness, whether he has made representations of any particular nature, immediately after being asked whether he made any representation, he must be asked whether he made the representation by parol or in writing. Ibid. 292 9. If, on the trial of an action or indictment, a witness examined on the part of the Plaintiff or prosecutor, upon cross-examination by Defendant's counsel, states, that at a time specified he told A. that he was one of the witnesses against the Defendant, and, being re-examined by the Plaintiff's or prosecutor's counsel, states what induced him to mention this to A., the Plaintiff's or prosecutor's counsel cannot further re-examine the witness as to such conversation, even as far only as it related to his being one of the witnesses: by eight Judges against one (Best J. dissentiente) and confirmed by the House of Lords. Ibid. 294 10. If a witness examined in chief on the part of the Plaintiff, being asked whether he remembers a quarre] taking taking place between A. and B., answer, that he has heard of a quarrel between them, but does not know the cause of it, and such witness be not asked, upon his crossexamination, whether he has or has not made a declaration stated in the question touching the cause of the quarrel, the counsel for the Defendant cannot, in order to prove such witness's knowledge of the cause of the quarrel, afterwards examine a witness to prove that the other witness has made such a declaration to him touching the cause of such quarrel. The Queen's Page 299 case. 11. If a witness examined in chief on the part of the Plaintiff, being asked whether he remembers a quarrel taking place between A. and B., answer, that he does not remember it, and such witness be not asked, on his cross-examination, whether he has or has not made a a declaration stated in the question respecting such quarrel, the counsel for the Defendant cannot, in order to prove that such witness must remember the quarrel, afterwards examine a witness to prove that the other witness has made such a declaration. Ibid. 299 12. If, on the trial of an indictment for any crime, evidence has been given upon the cross-examination of witnesses examined in chief in support of the indictment, from which it appears that A. B. (not examined as a witness,) has been employed by the prosecutor as an agent to procure and examine evidence and witnesses in support of the indictment, the party indicted is not permitted to examine C, D. as a witness to prove, that A, B. has offered a bribe to E. F. in order to induce him to give testimony touching the matter in the indictment, (E. F. not being a witness examined in support of the indictment, nor examined before it was so proposed to examine C.D.) The Queen's case. Page 302 13. If, in the trial of an indictment for any crime, evidence has been given upon the cross-examination of witnesses examined in chief in support of the indictment, from which it appears that A. B. (not examined as a witness,) has been employed by the prosecutor as an agent to procure and examine evidence and witnesses in support of the indictment, the party indicted is not permitted to examine G. H. as a witness to prove that A. B. has offered him a bribe, to induce him to bring to A. B. papers belonging to the party indicted, (G. H. not having been examined as a witness in support of the indictment.) Ibid. 299 14. On a prosecution for a crime, the proof whereof is supposed to consist wholly or in part of evidence of a conspiracy entered into by the party then indicted, and under trial, so that the conspiracy is to be given in evidence against him, -general evidence of the existence of the conspiracy charged, may be 3D 3 re to it, takes the oath in the usual form, he may be afterwards asked, whether he thinks the oath binding upon his conscience; but it is unnecessary and irrelevant to ask him, if he considers any other form of oath more binding, and such question cannot be asked. The Queen's case. Page 284. 5. It is not allowable, on cross-examination, in the statement of a question to a witness, to represent the contents of a letter, and to ask the witness whether he wrote a letter to any person with such contents, or contents to the like effect, without having first shewn the witness the letter, and having asked him whether he wrote that letter. Ibid. 6. Two or three lines of a letter may be exhibited to a witness, without exhibiting to him the whole, and the witness may be asked whether he wrote the part exhibited. Ibid. 286 But, if the witness deny that he wrote such part, he cannot be examined as to the contents of the letter. Ibid. 7. If, on cross-examination, a witness admits a letter to be of his handwriting, he cannot be questioned by counsel whether statements, such as the counsel may suggest, are contained in it, but the whole letter must be read in evidence. In the ordinary course of proceeding, such letter must be read, as part of the cross-examining counsel's case. The Court, however, may permit it to be read at 8. an earlier period, if the counsel suggest that he wishes to have the letter immediately read, in order to found certain questions upon it, considering it, however, as part of the evidence of the counsel proposing such a course, and subject to the consequences thereof. The Queen's case. If, on cross-examination, it is proPage 288 posed to ascertain of a witness, whether he has made representations of any particular nature, immediately after being asked whether he made any representation, he must be asked whether he made the representation by parol or in writing. Ibid. 292 9. If, on the trial of an action or indictment, a witness examined on the part of the Plaintiff or prosecutor, upon cross-examination by Defendant's counsel, states, that at a time specified he told A. that he was one of the witnesses against the Defendant, and, being re-examined by the Plaintiff's or prosecutor's counsel, states what induced him to mention this to A., the Plaintiff's or prosecutor's counsel cannot further re-examine the witness as to such conversation, even as far only as it related to his being one of the witnesses: by eight Judges against one (Best J. dissentiente) and confirmed by the House of Lords. Ibid. 294 10. If a witness examined in chief on the part of the Plaintiff, being asked whether he remembers a quarrel case. taking place between A. and B., answer, that he has heard of a quarrel between them, but does not know the cause of it, and such witness be not asked, upon his crossexamination, whether he has or has not made a declaration stated in the question touching the cause of the quarrel, the counsel for the Defendant cannot, in order to prove such witness's knowledge of the cause of the quarrel, afterwards examine a witness to prove that the other witness has made such a declaration to him touching the cause of such quarrel. The Queen's Page 299 11. If a witness examined in chief on the part of the Plaintiff, being asked whether he remembers a quarrel taking place between A. and B., answer, that he does not remember it, and such witness be not asked, on his cross-examination, whether he has or has not made a a declaration stated in the question respecting such quarrel, the counsel for the Defendant cannot, in order to prove that such witness must remember the quarrel, afterwards examine a witness to prove that the other witness has made such a declaration. Ibid. 299 12. If, on the trial of an indictment for any crime, evidence has been given upon the cross-examination of witnesses examined in chief in support of the indictment, from which it appears that A. B. (not examined as a witness,) has been employed by the prosecutor as an agent to procure and examine evidence and witnesses in support of the indictment, the party indicted is not permitted to examine C, D. as a witness to prove, that A, B. has offered a bribe to E. F. in order to induce him to give testimony touching the matter in the indictment, (E. F. not being a witness examined in support of the indictment, nor examined before it was so proposed to examine C. D.) The Queen's case, Page 302 13. If, in the trial of an indictment for any crime, evidence has been given upon the cross-examination of witnesses examined in chief in support of the indictment, from which it appears that A. B. (not examined as a witness,) has been employed by the prosecutor as an agent to procure and examine evidence and witnesses in support of the indictment, the party indicted is not permitted to examine G. H. as a witness to prove that A. B. has offered him a bribe, to induce him to bring to A. B. papers belonging to the party indicted, (G. H. not having been examined as a witness in support of the indictment.) Ibid. 299 |