CHARACTER. In Evidence. The opinion generally entertained of a person de rived from the common report of the people who are acquainted with him. 3 Serg. & R. Penn. 336; 3 Mass, 192; 3 Esp. 236.
2. The moral character and conduct of a person in society may be used, in proof be fore a jury in three classes of eases: fret, to afford a presumption that a particular party has not been guilty of a criminal act ; second; to affect the damages in, particular eases, where their amount depends on the character and conduct of any individual; and, third, to impeach or confirm the veracity of a wit ness.
3. Where the guilt of an accused party is doubtful, and the character of the supposed agent is involved in the question, a presump tion of innocence arises from his former eon, duet in society, as evidenced by his general character; since it is not probable that a per son of known probity and humanity would commit a dishonest or outrageous act in the particular instance. But where it is a ques tion of great and atrocious criminality,, the commission of the act is so unusual, so out of the ordinary course of things and beyond common experience,—it is so manifest that the offence, if perpetrated, must have been in, fluenced by motives frequently operating upon the human mind—that evidence of cha racter, and of a man's habitual conduct under common circumstances, must be far inferior to what it is in the instance of accusations of a lower grade. Against facts strongly proved, good character cannot avail. It is therefore in smaller offences, in such as relate to the actions of daily and common life, as when one is charged with pilfering and stealing, that evidence of a high, character for honesty will satisfy a jury that the accused is not likely to yield to so• slight a temptation. In such ease, where the evidence is doubtful, proof of character may be given with good effect. But still, even with regard to the higher crimes, testimony of good character, though of less avail, is competent evidence to the jury, and a. species of evidence which the accused has a right to offer. But it behooves one charged with an atrocious crime, like mur der, to prove a high character, and, by strong evidence, to make it counterbalance a strong amount of proof on the part of tho prosecu tion. It is the privilege of the accused to put his character in issue, or not. If he does, and offers evidence, of good character, then the prosecution may give- evidence to rebut, and counteract it. But it is not competent for the government to give in proof the bad character of the defendant, unless he first opens that line of inquiry by evidence of good character. Per Shaw, C. J., 5 Cush. Mass. 325. See 5 Esp. 13.; 1 Campb. 460; aid. 519.; 2 Strange, 925; 2 State Tr. 1038 ; 1 Coxe, N. J.
4`p=.5 5 Serg. & R. Penn. 352; 2 Bibb, Ky. 286; 3 wt. 195; 5 Day, Cunn. 260; 7 Conn. 116,; 14 Ala. 382; 6 Cow. N. Y. 673; 3 Hawks, No. C. 105.
4. In some instances, evidence in disparage meat of character is admissible, not in order to prove or disprove the commission of a par ticular, fact, but with a view to damages. In
actions for criminal conversation with the plaintiff's wife, evidence may be given of the wife's general bad character tor want of chas tity, and even of particular acts of adultery committed by her previous to her intercourse with the defendant. Buller, Nisi P. 27, 296•; 12 Mod, 232; 3 Esp. 236. See 5 Muni. "Va. 10., In actions for slander or libel, the law is well, settled that evidence of the previous gene ral character of the plaintiff, before and at the time of the publication of the slander or libel, is admissible, under the general issue, in mitigation of damages. The ground of ad mitting such evidence is that a person of dis paraged fame is not entitled to the same mea sure of damages as one whose character is unblemished, And the reasons which author ize the admission of this species of evidence under the general issue alike exist, and re quire its admission, where a justification has been pleaded but the defendant has failed in sustaining it. Stone a. Varney, 7 Mote. Mass. 86, where the decisions are collected and re viewed ; 11 Cush. Mass. 241; 3 Pick. Mass, 378; 4 Den. N. Y. 509; 20 Vt. 232; 6 Penn. St. 170; Nott & So. C. 511; 1 id. 268; Heard, Lib. & Sland. 299., See 1 Johns. N. Y. 46; 11 id. 38. When evidence is adr mitted touching the general character of a party, it is manifest that it is to be confined to matters in reference to the nature of the charge against him. 2 Wend, N. Y. 252.
5. The party against whom a witness is called may disprove the facts stated by him, or may examine other witnesses as to his gene ral character; but they will not be allowed to speak of particular facto or parts of his con duct., Buller, Nisi P. 296. For example, eta deuce of the general character of a prdsecutrin for a rape may be given, as that she was a streetwalker; but evidence of specific acts of criminality eannbt be admitted. 3 & P: 589. And see 17 Conn. 467. 18 Me. 372; 14 Mass. 387 ; 5 Cox, Cr. Cas. 146. The regular mode is to inquire whether the witness under examination has the means of knowing the for mer witness's general character, and whether, from such knowledge, he would believe him on his• oath. 4 State Tr. 693 ; 4 Esp. 102. In answer to such evidence against character, the other party may cross-examine the wit ness as to his means of knowledge and the grounds of his opinion, or he may attack such witness's general (distracter, and by fresh evi dence support the eharaeter of his own. 2 Stark. 151, 241; Starkie, Ey. pt. 4, 1753 to 1758; 1 Phillipps, Ey. 229. A. party cannot give evidence to confirm the good character of a witness, unless his general character has been impugned by his antagonist. 9 Watts, Penn. 124. Consult Greenleaf: Phillippe, Starkie on Evidence; Roscoe, Crim. Evi dence ; Bouvier, Institutes.