Witness.--"Yes, Sir."
Counsel.--"Pray which of the line of traces was it that corresponded with the shoes of the prisoner?"
Witness.--"They were all the same. There were two lines, one from the fish-pond to the haw-haw, and one back again to the spot where the corpse was found."
"That is to say, merely to and fro," said the counsel.
Witness.--"Yes, Sir; I did not see any more."
"Pray, did you measure any body else's shoes?" was the next question; but immediately the counsel for the prosecution rose and objected to the course of the cross-examination.
He said "that nothing in the examination-in-chief could naturally lead to the questions now asked."
"I seek, my lord," said Mr. B----, "simply to elicit the truth, which is, I believe, the object of the court. The witness has admitted that one of the men, in examining the spot after the murder, went from that spot to the haw-haw and back; and that there were but two lines of traces. Now I wish to show--"
Judge.--"I cannot allow the argument to go on. There are rules of evidence which no one is better acquainted with than the counsel for the defence. He must be aware that this line of cross-examination is inadmissible."
Counsel.--"I bow to the ruling of the court. You may go down, Sir."