an affection at least as strong in favor of life? If
concealment of the fact is a presumptive evidence of murder,
so strong as to overbalance all other evidence that may
possibly be produced to take away the presumption, why not
trust the force of this incontestable presumption to the
jury, who are, in a regular course, to hear presumptive, as
well as positive testimony? If the presumption, arising from
the act of concealment, may be destroyed by proof positive
or circumstantial to the contrary, why should the
legislature preclude that contrary proof? Objection. The
crime is difficult to prove, being usually committed in
secret. Answer. But circumstantial proof will do; for
example, marks of violence, the behavior, countenance, &c.
of the prisoner, &c. And if conclusive proof be difficult to
be obtained, shall we therefore fasten irremovably upon
equivocal proof? Can we change the nature of what is
contestable, and make it incontestable? Can we make that
conclusive which God and nature have made inconclusive?
Solon made no law against, parricide, supposing it
impossible any one could be guilty of it; and the Persians,
from the same opinion, adjudged all who killed their reputed
parents to be bastards: and although parental, be yet
stronger than filial affection, we admit saticide proved on
the most equivocal testimony, whilst they rejected all proof
of an act, certainly not more repugnant to nature, as of a
thing impossible, improvable. See Beccaria, Sec. 31.

Whosoever committeth murder by poisoning, shall suffer death by poison.

Whosoever committeth murder by way of duel, shall suffer death by
hanging; and if he were the challenger, his body, after death, shall
be gibbeted.* He who removeth it from the gibbet, shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor; and the officer shall see that it be replaced.

* 25 G. 2. c. 37.

Whosoever shall commit murder in any other way, shall suffer death by
hanging.

And in all cases of petty treason and murder, one half of the lands
and goods of the offender shall be forfeited to the next of kin to
the person killed, and the other half descend and go to his own
representatives. Save only, where one shall slay the challenger in a
duel,* in which case, no part of his lands or goods shall be forfeited
to the kindred of the party slain, but, instead thereof, a moi