NOT BOUND TO ANSWER.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14348, 19 April 1910, Page 6

NOT BOUND TO ANSWER.

INTERESTING LAW POINT. Argument was heard before Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday on a point raised aa to whether a witness in a breach of award case could bo compelled to give cvidencc, the ground for refusal being that ho was to be charged later on in connection with the same set of circumstances, and his evidence might incriminate him. The information had been laid by the Auckland Painters' Union, from whose point of view Mr. A. E. Skclton argued, contending that the man could bo compelled to give evidence. Dr. Bamford addressed tho Court on the other side. His Worship, in giving his decision, said in all British courts ot justice there had been a rule that no witness could be compelled to answer any question-which, in tho opinion of the judge, might tend to incriminate him. This privilege had only been infringed upon by recent legislation, which compelled witnesses in certain cases to answer questions which might incriminato them, but it had, as it were, compensated them by practically indemnifying them. Before any Court would bo justified in saying that tho privilege had been taken away by law, it must be shown very clearly that it had been taken away absolutely. He held that the witness in the case under notice was not bound to answer the questions that were asked him. His Worship suggested that Mr. Skclton might bring the matter under the notice of tho Minister.