The trial of Katharine Nairn [Ogilvie] and Patrick Ogilvie, for the crimes of incest and murder [of Thomas Ogilvie]. Containing the whole procedure of the High Court of Justiciary; upon the 5th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th days of August 1765 / [Katharine Nairn Ogilvie].

  • Nairne, Katharine.
Date:
1765
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The trial of Katharine Nairn [Ogilvie] and Patrick Ogilvie, for the crimes of incest and murder [of Thomas Ogilvie]. Containing the whole procedure of the High Court of Justiciary; upon the 5th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th days of August 1765 / [Katharine Nairn Ogilvie]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    46/136 (page 46)
    C 4*5 ] Sir David Dalrymple, on the part of his Ma- jefty’s Advocate, anfix'ered, That all and every one of the objections ought to be repelled ; and that for the reafons following : With relpect to the firjl, it is obvioufly irrelevant. No fuch thing is ever allowed in the practice of the Ju¬ diciary court, as a general proof of character ; and indeed, were it allowed, criminal trials in Scotland would become inextricable ; were the character, of each witnefs to be thus inquired into, there would be as many feparate trials as there are witneftes produced. Be- fiides, were this new form to be introduced, witneffes would be deterred from appearing upon citation given. Inftead of being called to give evidence, they would in effeCt be called to Band an inquiry upon the whole conduct of their lives. If they were to appear and undergo fuch a fcrutiny, they would come much worfe prepared for their defence than the parties themfelves when tried for the greateft crimes. For the parties know what is charged againft him, and by what evi¬ dence it is propofed to prove fuch charge : They are therefore enabled to prepare for their defence. But witnetTes neither know what may be charged againft them, nor by what evidence it is propofed to prove fuch charge ; they are therefore incapable of prepa¬ ring for their defence. Indeed, by the forms eftablifh- ed in Scotland, the public profecutcr himfelf has no means of confuting fuch a charge brought againft a witnefs. He may be poffeffed, as he is actually in' the prefent cafe, of certificates from credible perions to prove the character of the witnefs to be unbleraifhed; but he is not at liberty to produce them, becaufe he mult confine himfelf to the examination ol the witneffes whofe names are given out with the libel, and to the evidence therein mentioned. With refpect to the fecond objection. That the wit¬ nefs is a common proftitute, &c. it cannot be received in this cafe; for the crimes charged are occult crimes, faid to have been committed intra familiam, and they can only be proved by witriefles who refided in the fit-