Summary

Samuel Nelson Bridges v. Armour — Opinion of the Court

But the tribunals which maintain the competency of the party, if divested of interest, still hold that he cannot be compelled to testify, and, also, that he cannot be compelled to testify when called against his interest; which, upon general principles, if consistently carried out and allowed to govern the question in the admission of the party, would lead them to an opposite result. They should be compelled to testify
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature