portant statute (6 and 7 Vict. c. 85) was enacted, "for
improving the Law of Evidence"--the chief object of which was, to remove
all such difficulties as that which formed the subject of Mr.
Parkinson's inquiries. Witnesses are now no longer "incompetent" to give
evidence by reason of _crime_ or of any _interest_ which they may have
in, or in respect of, the subject-matter of the action.

Note 19. Page 346.

Whether Mr. Aubrey was _justified_ in doing this, under his
circumstances, is a question which the author has seen, and heard,
several times keenly discussed. It is surprising how much may be said on
both sides of the question, by ingenious casuists.

Note 20. Page 405.

For this glorious and inestimable safeguard of the liberty of the
subject, we are indebted to the ancient common law of England,
strengthened from time to time by the legislature, and now made secure
against the insidious encroachments of tyranny. The chief statute passed
with this view is known as _The Habeas Corpus Act_ (31 Car. II. c. 2),
and "has been incorporated into the jurisprudence of every state in the
Union" in America.--STORY, _Commentaries on the Constitution of the U.
S._, vol. iii. p. 208.

"It is a very common mistake," says Mr. Hallam, and the Lord
Chief-Justice of the Queen's Bench had occasion, during Michaelmas Term
1844, publicly to make a similar observation, "not only among
foreigners, but many from whom some knowledge of our constitutional laws
might be expected, that the statute of Charles II. enlarged in a great
degree our liberties, and forms a sort of epoch in their history; but
though a very beneficial enactment, it introduced no new principle, nor
conferred any right upon the subject.... It was not to bestow an
immunity from arbitrary imprisonment, which is abundantly provided in
Magna Charta (if, indeed, not much more ancient,) that the statute of
Charles II. was enacted; but to cut off the abuses by which the
government's lust of power, and the servile subtlety of crown lawyers,
had impaired so fundamental a privilege."--3 HALL. _Const. Hist._, pp.
16, 17.

Note 21. Page 421.

The general character of the Newspaper Press, both in London and the
country, has so greatly improved of late years, as (with a very few
despicable exceptions) to render the appearance now-a-days, of such a
paragraph as that in the text, exceedingly rare. The Press is now, in
most instances, presided over by educated and gifted _g