case walker against Kerney the affidavit of a person who have be convict of  forgery can be read in support of a complaint but may be read in exculpation  of a charge S c stram upon some oppression and extort of money from the  defendant by some sheriff officer a rule be make for the officer to answer the  matter in the defendant Kerneys affidavit upon show cause it be object that  the affidavit can not be read because the party who make it be convict have  judgement and stand in the pillory for forgery and a record of Kerneys  conviction with the judgement enter thereon be produce in court lee chief  justice the question be whether the affidavit of a person who have be convict  receive judgement and stand in the pillory for forgery all of which have be  make out by produce before we a copy of the conviction and judgement and by  the affidavit of a gentleman to Kerneys stand in the pillory in the year and  also to the identity of the person can be read in support of the present  complaint and upon the best consideration of this case and the foot of the  determination that have be like to this or seem to I to bear a near analogy to  it I be of opinion that this affidavit can be read the case in Mod a see the  note to this case a be certain the same case of which there be mention make in  salk which be this Davis and carter be convict of forge a bank bill and have  stand in the pillory for it and be also commit to Newgate until they pay the  fine set upon they be bring up to the court of king bench modern and they pray  that they may be turn over to the Marshalsea because the sheriff of London  oppress they in Newgate and their own affidavit be offer to prove the  oppression and by the chief justice if a man have have a infamous judgement  and have stand in the pillory for a offence which be contrary to the faith  credit and trust of mankind as forgery be he can be a witness in any cause  hale say hale and see hawk p c a if a man have stand on the pillory he can be  a witness but that be to be understand of a infamous judgement but if a man be  convict of a libel and have be in the pillory for it yet perhaps he may be a  witness and the affidavit of Davis and carter be not read the account of this  case in salk be a very lose one and such as I can pay any regard to and  therefore must depend upon the case as I have read it to you out of Mod the  case of Delahaut v NicholsBarnes pract Reg b I be inform be a motion to  discharge a man upon common bail the only affidavit to prove the debt be that  of a person who be convict of forgery c and the court discharge the defendant  upon common bail because the affidavit of a person under such circumstance be  no affidavit within the Act of parliament and therefore debt be swear to to  hold the party to special bail the case of the king v Charlesworth in this  court in Lord Raymond time be report by Mr Lacy from the bar to be a  information against Charlesworth for forge a warrant of attorney for which he  be convict have judgement and stand in the pillory and that upon a motion for  a attachment against he for some contempt of the court he offer to clear  himself upon his own affidavit and the court admit it because it be only to  purge himself and not to accuse or charge a three person as the court say they  may as well admit his oath now as upon interrogatory I myself remember the  admit the affidavit of Charlesworth to be read and that it be to clear himself  of a thing lie to his charge but any further I do not know but there be all  the reason in the world to believe that the case be as modern er p Mr Lacy  have cite it to I and there be reason for that distinction where a affidavit  of a infamous person shall be read to clear himself but not to charge a three  person and if his affidavit be not to be admit in case of a attachment he will  be condemned in the first instance the case of a Quaker I take to be strong in  point against the admission of Kerneys affidavit you tell we here be a man who  have receive a injury and will not the court bear his complaint we answer it  be the course of the court that no complaint can be receive but upon affidavit  and if Kerney can make a affidavit we can admit his complaint this be also the  case of quaker in criminal matter who refuse to take a oath in which case we  can relieve they in the case of Hilton Hilton v Byron Mod SC salk c there be a  application to this court by a Quaker for a breach of the peace to have  article exhibit against the party upon his modern solemn affirmation which be  deny by the court for a solemn affirmation do not amount to a oath in criminal  matter and without a actual oath we can make a person find surety of the peace  though he have do ever so great a personal injury to a Quaker there have be  some doubt indeed upon the construction of the statute whether article of the  peace be of a criminal nature but there have be many case where a attachment  shall not issue upon a quaker see king v gardener burr Atcheson v Everitt Cowp  a affirmation therefore I be of opinion that Kerneys affidavit be not to be  read and that the rule be to be discharge page justice be of the same opinion  it be now settle in the case of Pendock v Mackender will that it be the infamy  of the crime and not the nature of the punishment that render the party a  incompetent witness see also the note to Davis case Mod b chapel justice be  absent and sick at bath wright justice it be admit that a infamous person can  be admit as a witness in civil case not even in the case of a three person  because of the suppose iniquity of his evidence but it be say though he can be  a witness in civil matter yet he may be a accuser for it be for the public  weal that offender shall be prosecute but there be a clause in great Charta c  in these word nullus ballivus to put down once ad law palpable nec ad  juramentum simple speech svan without witness trusty ad hoc lead in now the  word ballivus include all the officer of justice in this kingdom and among the  rest this court what then be the meaning of the word credible witness they  must certain be apply to person that be not so and a infamous person can never  be a credible witness it be of the utmost consequence that person who be  infamous shall rather be restrain front be accuser than witness in civil  matter and affair of property for if they be allow to accuse the life of  multitude of people of reputation and innocence may be take away or at least  bring into danger by person who have forfeit all pretention both to reputation  and innocence the court let the rule be discharge modern easter term the  fourteenth of George the second in the king bench sir William lee Knt chief  justice sir Francis page Knt sir William chapel Knt Martin wright Esq justice  sir Dudley rider Knt attorneygeneral sir John strange Knt solicitor general