THE MEIKLE CASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6491, 10 April 1908, Page 7

THE MEIKLE CASE

LETTER TO THE PREMIER. The local committee which interested itself in the case of J. J. Mieikle, has written to the Premier with respect to a reply made to a deputation on tho XBth November, to tho effect that certain questions relating to the nature of tho relief to oe given to Mr Meikle in respect of his wrongful conviction would be submitted to the Judges when next assembled for the Court of Appeal. Owing to the absence from Wellington of the Premier, no reply has yet I ceil received to the communication. The letter points out that the committee is still of tho opinion that any informal reference to their Honors would be unsatisfactory, unjust to the injured man, and open to the very grave constitutional objection of making the Judges the political advisers on matters of public policy. The question which really interests the country, the letter points out, is whether or not Mr Meikle is to be presumed innocent of the orimeof whioli he was convicted. The commissioners had found that the conviction should be squashed but their omission to supply any analysis of the evidence or even the baldest outline of the facts, or to support their finding by any reasons except those unfavourable to tho accused, they had left it open to tho ignorant or vindictive to Say that tho finding merely amounts to a verdict of “not proven after twenty years.” ~, , , , 'lf the judges are merely to bo atircd tj advise how this unfortunate mart may receive a fair and conclusive trial, my committee would welcome the reference. Either a general or a special court of criminal appeal, entrusted with the revision of the whole matter ab initio, and precluded frrtm the wholesale evasions of the oommi®ioaors by the submission ef a series of definite and precise issues, would bottle the question of Mr Meiklo’s innocence onoe for all. If his innocence is clearly and authoritatively established, the measure of relief will no longer cause axy doubt er division among decent men. If it is not, Mr Meikle may have to rest content with technical quashing of his conviction. Such are the conclusions at which the committee has arrived after careful .met anxious consideration, and it would he glad to hear how far the Government has gob, and in whiat manner it proposes to approach the Judges, who are now assembled in Wellington.”