1890_CRIMINAL_LAW_PROCEDURE_ORDINANCE — Page 6

754

Proof of contra- dictory state-

ments of adverse witness.

Cross-examina- tion as to previous statements in writing.

Proof of previona conviction of a

witness may be given.

Attesting witness need not be called,

except in certain cases,

Comparison of disputed writing

ORDINANCE No. 3 of 1865.

Criminal Law Procedure.

of the Court, prove adverse, contradict him by other evidence, or, by leave of the Court, prove that he has made at other times a statement inconsistent with his present testimony; but before such last inentioned proof can be given, the circumstances of the supposed statement, sufficient to designate the particular occasion, must be mentioned to the witness, and be must be asked whether or not he has made such statement. [Repealed by Ordinance No. 2 of 1889,]

26. If a witness, upon cross-examination as to a former statement made by him relative to the subject-matter of the trial, and inconsistent with his present testimony, does not distinctly admit that he has made such statement, proof may be given that he did in fact make it; but before such proof can be given, the circumstances of the supposed statement, sufficient to designate the particular occasion, must be mentioned to the witness, and he must be asked whether or not he has made such statement. [Repealed by Ordinance No. 2 of 1889.]

27. A witness may be cross-examined as to previous statements made by him in writing or reduced into writing, relative to the subject-matter of the information, without such writing being shown to him; but if it is intended to contradict such witness by the writing, his attention must, before such contradictory proof can be given, be called to those parts of the writing which are to be used for the purpose of so con- tradicting him: Provided always, that it shall be competent for the Court, at any time during the trial, to require the production of the writing for its inspection, and the said Court may thereupon make such use of it, for the purposes of the trial, as it shall think fit. [Repealed by Ordinance No. 2 of 1889.]

28. A witness on any trial may be questioned as to whether he has been con- victed of any felony or misdemeanor, and, upon being so questioned, if he either denies the fact, or refuses to answer, it shall be lawful for the opposite party to prove such conviction; and a certificate containing the substance and effect only (omitting the formal part) of the indictment or information and conviction for such offence, purport- ing to be signed by the clerk of the Court, or other officer having the custody of the records of the Court where the offender was convicted, or by the deputy of such clerk or officer, shall, upon proof of the identity of the person, be sufficient evidence of the said conviction, without proof of the signature or official character of the person appear- ing to have signed the same. Repealed by Ordinance No. 2 of 1889.]

29. It shall not be necessary to prove by the attesting witness any instrument to the validity of which attestation is not requisite; and such instrument may be proved by admission, or otherwise, as if there had been no attesting witness thereto. [Repealed by Ordinance No. 2 of 1889.]

30. Comparison of a disputed writing with any writing proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be genuine shall be permitted to be made by witnesses; and such writings, and the evidence of witnesses respecting the same, may be submitted to the Court and jury as evidence of the genuineness or otherwise, of the writing in dispute. [Repealed by Ordinance No. 2 of 1889.]