Legal Amenities.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 4208, 8 October 1886, Page 3

Legal Amenities.

During the cross-examination of Professor H, p. 4.1180 on the trial of Mrs Elizabeth Taylor at the Criminal Court at Melbourne on the 27th nit., Mr Justice Holroyd took occasion to call in question the manner in which Mr rums, Q. 0., who was the leading coupeel for the defence, was conducting it. Mrs Taylor was charged with having by malpractice caused the death of Miss Julia Warbnrton, and Professor Allen, who had made the post mortem examination on the' body of deceased, was erstained to prove that death was caused

by violence. In Gross-examination Mr Pntves attempted to show that the witness had no practical experi<-i.ce in the subjects on which he gave evidence, and in reference to one answer that the witness gave, said “ Where did you pick op that knowledge ?” and the witness replied, “ From the works of standard authors." Mr Parves—

“We read the same works, and have the same means of obtaining knowledge.” Professor Allen —“ Yon are quite at liberty to say so, but the difference is that you read the books, but you don’t nnderstand them." Mr Parves—“ So you say, bnt I suppose you are just as capable of saying that as yon are of writing impertinent letters to yonr superiors.” Mr Justice Holroyd said that was a grossly insolent remark to make to the witness. Mr Parves replied—“ Your Honor did not hear what the witness said ; if yon did, 1 am at a loss to understand your Honor’s remarks.’’ Mr Justice Holroyd—“Yon have exhibited impertinence towards the witness.” MrPurves—“lf so your Honor should stop it.” Mr Justice Holroyd—“l will stop it." Mr Parves— 11 1 shall ask snob questions as I think proper ; bnt when yonr Honor stops me I shall desist.” Mr Justice Holroyd—“Yon have insinuated that the witness was improperly employed to conduct the examination, and that be knows nothiog about his business. You have asked most illegitimate questions and yon reflect on me for interfering.’’ Mr Parves—“ Then your Honor has a most singular mind. Of coarse it is my business to break down the witness, and 1 have endeavored to do so. I have not reflected on your Honor, and if yonr Honor is under such a misapprehension lam quite prepared to pass over yonr other remarks.” Mr JusticQ Holroyd—“ I say that yon are grossly impertinent and insolent.” Mr Parves—“ That is a matter of opinion. It is my bonnden duty to ask such questions as I think proper, and to conduct my case in my own way.” Mr Justice Holroyd—“l am quite aware of that, and I am not afraid of you, Mr Purves.” Mr Parves—- “ And, thank God, 1 am not afraid of your Honor.” Mr Justice Holroyd—- “ Yon have been grossly insolent to the witness, and I shall stop it.” Mr Porves—“Yonr Honor can do what yon please, but I have oond acted eases before Judges quite equal in ability to your Honor, and have asked qnestions of the same kind.” The cross examination as to the details of the jpost mortem was then proceeded with without any dispute.—“ Argus.”