PHI LOS 0 P H Y . - Classic Works of Apologetics Online

414 OjCrinlCJ 011d PUlzis/JniE1I.is.
\
\
justice; and that species of e=:couragement, which,
as hath been ju~t D.O\V observed, the nlinds of such
men are most apt to entertain al1d d'.,\·ell upon.
There are two popular maxims, whicl) seem to
have a consider~ble h.fluence in producing the .injudicious
a.cquitta!s of which we· complain. (Jne is,
"that circumstantial evidence f;.ills short of ~~itive
Efi.~f.u This assertion, in die unqualified ~ense -in'
W Ich it is applied, is not true. A concurrence of
. well-authenticated circumstances composes a stronger­
! ground of assurance than positive testimony., uncon·
firnled by circumstances, usually affords. Circumstances
cannot lie. The conclusion also which re·
suhs from them, though deduced by only probable
inference) is conlmollly more to be re1ied upon than
the veracity of an unsupported solit~lry witness.
4he 1 danger of being deceived is less, tIle actual in ..
stances of deception are fewer, in the one case than
the other. '\That is called positive procf in criminal
inatters, as \vhere a man swears to tIle person_ of the
prisoner, and that he actually S2.W him commit the
crime with which he is charged, may be found~d in
the mi,take or perjury of a single witness. Such
l}.lista:ke~, and ~tlch perjuries are not \\"itll0Ut many
examples. vVhereas, to impose upon a court of justice,
a chain of cirCUJJIJillntial evidence in support of a
fabricated accusation, requires such a number of
false ,vitnesses as seldoln meet together; an union
also of skill and wickedness \\yhich i~ stiil more rare;
and after all, thi~ species of proof lies- much more
open to di~cussion, and is more likely, if false, to be
contradicted, or to betray itself by some unforeseen
inconsi-tency, than that direct proof, which, being
confined within tLe knowledge of a dngle person,
which appealing to, or standing connected with, no.
cxterrlal or coliateral cirCUll1sta11CeS., is incapable, by
its very ~i.mpl'city, of being confronted with oppo ..
)1 te pr()balliliries.
1/ rThe otl1er maxi tn, \vhich drser\·es; a ~inlilar ex­
" amination, is this, ,- that it is better· that h'n guilty
(:.k'I~,ons C·.c:"pe, tl.:ltl t!u.t one InnocC'nt man sh{~ul.d
\uf'H!r." It by "a)'II1J It IS b:,;'/fcr, be mcant that It l~