Harris, Solicitor, Ex Parte .

73 N.C. 65

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: June 5, 1875
• Status: Published

Opinion

ByNüM, J.

This case is governed by the decision of this Court in the State v. Adair, 68 N. C. Rep., 68, which is so-directly in point, that his Honor must have overlooked it or he would have allowed the motion. It is there held that the act of 1S68, Bat. Rev., chap. 54, sec. 40, applies only to parties strictly so called, and not to the State, upon the maxim that general statutes do not bind the sovereign unless expressly mentioned in them. State v. Garland, 7 Ired., 58. The prisoner by our existing law is a competent witness, and the State is therefore entitled to his evidence, which may be procured in the way prescribed by law. Neither the Court below or this Court has the right to presume that the officers of the law, chosen to represent the public justice of the State, will abuse that high trust by either an inhuman or injudicious exercise of their powers.

The case does not present a fit occasion for the animadversion contained in his Honor’s judgment.

There is error.

Pee: Oúeiam.

Judgment reversed.