A WIFE'S EVIDENCE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXX, Issue 22, 26 July 1910, Page 8

A WIFE'S EVIDENCE.

«. -»AN INTERESTING CASE. An interesting point was raised before the Court of Appeal this afternoon, when the court was asked to determine ■whether there was power to compel a married woman to give evidence against her husband, the accused, upon a charge of indecent assault, the parties having been married after the assault was committed. The accused's name appeared as Charlie Grbich, and the case, an Auckland case, was heard before his Honour Mr. Justice Chapman. The Crown Prosecutor stated that he relied upon the wife's evidence, and his Honour therefore directed the Grand Jury to throw out the bill. Grbich was acquitted. His Honour (Chief Justice Stout) presided, and . Mr. Justice Williams, Mr. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justice Chapman, were also on the Bench. The Solicitor-General (Mr. J. W. Salmond) appeared for the Crown, and Mr. Bamford, Auckland, for the accused. The case raised two ouestions, said Mr. Salmond. The first was as to whether a wife was competent to give evidence against her husband on a charge of indecent assault ( committed before the marriage of the parties? The second point was as to whether she was compellable to give such evidence? Mr. Justice Williams and Mr. Justice Cooper considered that if the wife was not competent to give evidence tho acquittal was correct. The Solicitor-General submitted thai though it was competent for a wife to give such evidence, it was not compellable. The court held, with the SolicitorGeneral, that in this case the woman was competent 'to give evidence, but not compellable. The Chief Justice noted the authorities on the point as obscure, and he thought the position ought to bo made plain by statute. Mr. Justice Williams agreed, and said it was* altogether against common decency, as well as disgraceful and immoral, that a wife should be compelled to give evidence in such a set of circumstances.