THE New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY). WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1887.

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 8011, 16 February 1887, Page 2

THE New Zealand Times (PUBLISHED DAILY).

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1887.

With which are incorporated the Wellington Independent, established 18$, and the New Zealander.

That several reforms are desirable ia, our system of procedure in the criminal law most people are agreed, but it is not so easy to obtain a con* sensus of opinion as to the direction which those reforms should take. The question of evidence is, however, the most prominent one, and, indeed, comprises within its scope moat of the alterations which reformers deem needful. Thera have long been earnest discussions among jurists as to the advisableneas of permitting defendants in criminal cases to give evidence on their own behalf. have been put forward both for and against the concession of this right, but the former have always appeared to us virtually conclusive. In many cases the accused person is the only one who can throw any light on a case; yet under our existent system , his mouth is closed, although were he a party in a civil case his evidence would, as a matter of course, be admissible. lio valid reason is given for such a difference being made. In either case the testimony of an unscrupulous defendant would assuredly be directed to the improvement of his case in the eyes of the jury, and juries such as those which figured in certain Wellington oases last year, or as that which recommended Caffrey and Penn to mercy, might not improbably be bamboozled. Still it is impossible to protect jurymen against every conceivable attempt to practice on their credulity, and there is no reason to suppose that their chances of being gulled would

ba materially increased by the admission of a prisoner’s evidence. It would be subject to sifting by cross-examination, and a jury would in any case bo duly cautioned by the Judge as to the weight to be given to such manifestly interested testimony. On the whole, the practical advantages in the interests of justice of admitting a prisoner’s evidence appear altogether to outweigh the theoretical disadvantages. But we are very conservative in such matters, and it takes a very long time to accustom the public mind to any alteration in our judicial procedure. It is thisstrong conservatism of feeling that has retained in our judicial system the absurdities of allowing an undoubtedly guilty person to escape scot-free because some item of evidence may have been irregularly admitted at hm trial, »ad of merely “ pardoning ’’ an innocent person who may have been erroneously convicted, and whose innocence t^%orme e r qUe “ tlydem "S ih WoVkl'Ji Sibil t£&Soh%'blle ‘course

IwiA & neVy trial as m civil cases, ,if tile CoVirt, o'f Appeal Sho'dlA 'decide that hiay 'erideh'ce his b'&en improperly j a’diflitted. To 'qtiash a conviction on j &Ccmint of the wrong admission of a certain item of evidence may involve a glaring miscarriage of justice. The evidence which has been improperly admitted may not be of a vital character; the case may have been sufficiently complete without it 4 , the jiiry may not have h‘S6n influenced by it tii t hWy Material 'degree. , Act If the Orofvn f’ro's'ectlfpr. have ‘determined to tender the evidenbe, and the 'Coutt of Appeal Should subsequently rale that it ought not to have been admitted, we may see a conviction quashed, and a murderous scoundrel, unquestionably guilty of the crime alleged against him, turned loose once more to work his wicked will to the grievous danger and damage of the lawabiding citizens. Clearly this ought not to be. Means should be provided for so dealing with questions of the kind as to obviate the reasonable probability of such miscarriages of justice. The functions oE a Criminal Court of Appeal should not be to afford facilities for undoubted criminals to wriggle out of their Juet meed of punishment through mere legal quibbles astutely worked up by ingenious Counsel, &nd bo to assist at an act of manifest injustice, but to enable a case in which a conviction may have been wrongfully obtained to undergo careful and intelligent review at the hands of clearsighted and experienced judges. Juries have ere now convicted innocent persons, either on transparently inadequate testimony through sheer lack of intelligence, or upon perjured evidence. It seems to us very desirable that there should be a possibility of appeal in cases of this sort, upon the facts as well as on points of law. The great function of Law Courts should be to secure that justice be done to ell, and it is to be feared that this end is by no means invariably attained under the present system. Here are other directions in which Mr Tele might exert his reforming energies. There is no reason why we should, await the lead of the Mother Country in such a matter than there was in the case of. many reforms in which we have taken the lead. ■: : v ■■ ■