has, in numerous instances, been very severely felt by those who
have had occasion to come into the courts of law. Many instances
have occurred, within my observation, where the persons accused
might, by the assistance of a counsel who possessed the ability
to penetrate the motives and intentions of the prosecutor, have
escaped the punishment which he has been compelled to endure.
Evidence is frequently mis-stated and misrepresented in the
courts, and this, owing to the great ignorance of numbers who are
brought forward as witnesses, is a circumstance of no rare
occurrence; the questions being taken down in writing, and, in
the attempt to give them some grammatical connection, ideas being
frequently perverted, and taken directly opposite to their
original meaning, without any intention whatever to enter into a
mis-statement. Now it must be sufficiently obvious that the
allowing of counsel would tend to do away this evil, since he
would himself be in the habit of taking notes of the evidence,
and would thus not only be able to detect any misrepresentation,
but would convey satisfaction to the mind of the prisoner
himself; and convince the spectators (who, by the bye, frequently
retire under very different impressions), that the accused has at
least been treated throughout with fairness. It cannot be
necessary to enter into reasoning to prove that this
mis-statement of evidence is an evil which calls for redress; and
I think the reader will concur with me in opinion, that no better
plan can be devised than the introduction of counsel into the
courts, who might keep a vigilant watch over the progress of the
trial, and not only insure the correct statement of the various
depositions, but be ready to take immediate advantage of any
circumstances which might arise of a favourable complexion to the
person accused, by which means many prisoners might be rescued