1778-02-17 (static/transcriptions/1778/02/033.jpg)

he ought to be examined, otherwise the Court are proceeding on what they know from the Witness himself not to be the whole of his Evidence.

Impey, said he was glad of an opportunity to determine against examining a Witness again after he had closed his Evidence, and especially after he had talk’d with the Attorneys and Advocates on both sides, in the Case of a Gentlemen whose credit was above any imputation, because it made the better precedent.

Chambers, came afterward, and agreed in opinion with the Cheif Justice, that Mr. Stewart should not be re-examined and therefore he was not.

I agree in opinion with them as a General Rule, but I think the Case of a Witness who openly avows, and is allow’d to conceal some thing, at the first giving his evidence, is an exception to this rule. I think the discourse Mr. Stewart must have had held, as was proved, with the Attorneys and Council did not make him more exceptionable but on the contrary, accounted very properly, for his being now ready to tell
/ what