_Serjeant Wright_ replied for the Crown. He admitted that a pardon would restore a convict to credit as a witness, and that an allowance of clergy, followed by a burning of the hand, would have the same effect: now that purgation was abolished, the burning had taken its place; 'that is the very terms of the statute on which he is to be discharged; that must actually be done before he can be put into the same condition that he was in before the conviction, and consequently make him capable of being a witness.' One of the cases quoted by Powys was distinguished, and Hale was quoted to support the argument for the Crown. _Lord Chief-Justice Treby_[40] was then called on for his opinion, and gave it that French was not a competent witness. He had not yet actually been pardoned, for pardons were not operative till they had passed the Great Seal. By his conviction he had forfeited his liberty, his power of purchasing chattels or holding land, and his credit. These losses formerly might be restored by purgation; but purgation was now replaced by burning in the hand. The imprisonment under the statute was not a necessary condition to a restoration of credit, because it was 'a collateral and a new thing'; the party was not imprisoned 'by virtue of his conviction, but by a fresh express order of the judges, made upon the heinousness of the circumstances appearing on the evidence. They may, and generally do, forbear to commit at all; and when they do, it may be for a month or two, at their discretion.' In any case the burning was a condition precedent to a restoration to credit. 'To me the law is evident. A peer shall have this benefit without either clergy or burning. A clerk in orders, upon clergy alone, without burning. A lay-clerk, not without both.' _Lord Chief-Baron Ward_[41] and _Nevill, J._,[42] expressed themselves as of the same opinion; and it was decided that French should not be admitted as a witness. It was then suggested that counsel should be heard on the point whether, supposing that Lord Warwick had been on Coote's side in the fight, he was guilty of his death; but it was decided that as there was still a question whether the facts were as alleged this could not be done. Lord Warwick was then invited to sum up his evidence, 'which is your own work, as not being allowed counsel as to matter of fact,' and to make any observations he liked. He preferred, however, to say nothing.