NEGATIVE TESTIMONY.

WE have recently had occasion to listen to various discussions on this peculiar kind of evidence. We are sorry to say there prevails at present a custom, which is sanctioned by nothing except its age, of regarding the statement of a student as false, while of a graduate, no matter if only of six months' standing, the direct contrary is assumed. In other words, if a student be requested to make a clear statement of his case, and if it be substantiated by two or three others, it is all considered as negative testimony, and is entirely overturned by one man's evidence, provided only he be a graduate; this is especially the case if there be the slightest prospect of an admonition or suspension.

Now, let us ask if it is fair to suppose that the undergraduate mind is naturally prone to lying. We see no reason for any such conclusion. Is it not rather absurd to assume that the year before he graduates his tendency is wholly in this direction and the year after exactly opposite? We do not believe that, if falsehood be so particularly the characteristic of the student's nature, the simple act of graduation will change him from a Baron Munchausen to a "Truthful James." Neither do we think that the possibility of mistakes belong exclusively to the undergraduate, and that the graduate is entirely exempt from them. Probably a student may be biased in his statement. Do not the existing rules have a tendency to produce this effect? "Call a man a thief, and he'll steal." The student knows that his assertion, instead of being considered true till proven false, is regarded false until proven true. This seems manifestly an unfair, not to say discourteous, method of treating him. Why should one man's testimony in this case counterbalance that of two or three others. The assumption that a student will lie is paying him a poor compliment as a gentleman, and to affirm that a graduate is incapable of it or of mistakes is to impute to the "sheep-skin" greater virtues than we had hitherto supposed it to have possessed.

It is affirmed by some that if a student told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, he would receive a greater penalty for his misconduct in question than if he were guilty of a falsehood and were even detected in it, simply because of his boldness in making the confession of his guilt. Instances seem to bear this statement out. The custom of believing a student's testimony only in case it is damaging to himself we hope will be less sanctioned in the future, and that hereafter he will be placed more on an equality with others in this respect.

HAC.