Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 05.pdf/298

 Practical Tests in Evidence. upon to do so, without calling upon the court to aid in the search for evidence in his behalf by ordering and subjecting her to an indeli cate examination of her person, with the hope of obtaining such information advanta geous to the defence, and call to his aid the power of the court as a means of humiliat ing her still more. When one voluntarily isserts a slanderous charge against another, and defends it by alleging the truth of his assertion, he must be able to substantiate the truth of the charge without invading the privacy of the person about whom the charge is made." This seems to be a unique case. The same principle was declared on a pro secution for rape (McGuff v. State, 88 Ala. 147). The court said : " Such a practice has never prevailed in this State, and if adopted as matter of right in all cases of prosecution for rape, the temptation to its abuse would be so great that it might be perverted into an engine of oppression to deter many modest and virtuous females from testifying in open court against the perpetration of one of the most barbarous and detestable of all crimes." The court distinguish the case from that where the party is voluntarily invoking the assistance of the court in pursuit of a civil right. The court doubt the power to compel the examination in question, but hold that at all events it is a matter of discretion in the trial court, and its refusal was not error. In Peoria, D. & E. Ry. Co. v. Rice, Su preme Court of Illinois, 33 N. W. Rep. 951, it was held that courts have no power to compel a plaintiff who, sues for damages for personal injuries to submit to a physical examination by medical experts. As to the exhibition of the person in bastardy proceedings, it was held that a child a little more than six months old may not be shown to the jury, in a bastardy suit, on the question of paternity (Overlock v. Hall, 81 Me. 348). And so when the child was six weeks old (Clark v. Bradstreet, 80 Me. 454; б Am. St. Rep. 221). The court say this, if allowed, " would be exceedingly

269

fanciful, visionary, and dangerous; " and " the weight of authority is against the admission in evidence of a mere infant, where race or color is not involved." In Crow v. Jordan Ohio Supreme Court, 32 N. E. Rep. 750, it was held, without any reported opinion, that in bastardy proceed ings the child may be exhibited to the jury as evidence of the alleged paternity and in corroboration of the testimony of the prosecutrix. In Leonard v. So. Рaс. Co., 21 Orcg. 555, 28 Рaс. Rep. 887, 15 Lawy. Rep. Ann. 221, it was held that a scar upon the outside of the bottom flange of a railroad rail was made by a wheel on an engine on the rail across the track, may be disproved by producing a similar wheel, although somewhat smaller than that on the engine, and rolling it upon a section of a similar railroad rail across which was laid another similar section in order to show that the wheel could not strike the flange as claimed, it being also shown that the larger the diameter of the wheel the farther it would avoid striking such flange. The court cited Eidt v. Cutter, 127 Mass. 522, an action for injury to a house, where it was disputed whether the injury was caused by fumes and gases from the defendant's copperas works or by emana tions from a neighboring sewer; and experts were allowed to testify as to experiments upon other premises exactly similar except ing the sewer; also Brooke 1'. Railroad Co., 8 1 Iowa, 504, where witnesses were allowed to testify as to experiments in placing their feet between rails in order to show how they might be caught. The court remarked : — "There seems to be some hesitation in receiv ing evidence of experiments or demonstrations : and from the liability to misconception and error, there can be no doubt that the experiments or demonstrations should be made under similar conditions and like circumstances. In all cases of this sort very much must necessarily be left to the discretion of the trial court; but when it appears that the experiment or demonstration has been made under conditions similar to those