In criminal cases, where things are pretended to be done against penal laws, such as this, the proofs ought to be clearer than the noon day light. Here is nothing proved, but one single witness named, and he a professed enemy, who never testified it upon oath, or before a judge, or so much as a public notary, or to the face of a protestant, but only whispered it in corners (as it is said by adversaries) among some of his own party. Such a testimony is not worth a deaf nut, in any cause between party and party. If he had been a witness beyond all exception, and had been duly sworn and legally examined, yet this testimony, in the most favourable cause, had been but half a proof, though a hundred did testify it from his mouth, it is still but a single testimony; and as it is, it is plain prittle-prattle, and ought to be valued no more than the shadow of an ass.