sness that it may be
fully proved against him, the prisoner plead guilty to the indictment,
it is considered as the highest species of conviction, and as soon as it
is entered on record the Court proceeds to judgment without further
proceedings on the indictments. But if the prisoner plead not guilty,
and put himself for trial upon his country, then a jury of twelve men
are to pass upon the defendant, and upon their verdict he is either to
be acquitted or convicted._

_And with respect to this jury, the English Law appears again more
equitable than perhaps any other in the world, for in this case as the
jury comes severally to the Book to be sworn, to try impartially between
the King and the prisoner of the bar, according to the evidence that is
given upon the indictment, the prisoner is even then at liberty to
except against, or as the law term it, to challenge, twenty of the jury
peremptorily, and as many more as he thinks fit on showing just cause.
So also, if the prisoner be an alien, the jury are to be half aliens and
half English. So tender is our constitution, not only of the lives of
its natural born subjects, but, also of those who put themselves under
its protection, that it has taken every precaution which the wit of man
could devise to prevent prejudice, partiality, or corruption from
mingling in any degree with the sentences pronounced upon offenders, or
in the proceedings upon which they are founded._

_Last of all we are to speak of the evidence or testimony which is to be
given for or against the prisoner at the time of his trial. And first
with respect to the evidence offered for the Crown; if it shall appear
that the person swearing shall gain any great and evident advantage by
the event of the trial in which he swears, he shall not be admitted as a
good witness against the prisoner. Thus in the case of Rhodes, tried
some years ago for forging letters of attorney for transferring South
Sea Stock belonging to one Mr. Heysham, the prosecutor, Mr. Heysham, was
not admitted to swear himself against the prisoner because in case of
conviction six thousand pounds stock must have replaced to his account.
But to this, though a general rule, there are some exceptions on which
the compass of this discourse will not permit us to dwell. It is also a
rule that a husband or wife cannot be admitted to testify against the
prisoner, but to this also there are some exceptions, as in the Lord
Audley's case,[57] where he