Untitled

Timaru Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 5196, 17 July 1891, Page 2

It is to be hoped that Mr Buckley's Supreme Court Act Amendment Bill will either be thrown out, or that one of its most important provisions will be eliminated. Possibly it muy be wise to place the costs m a Supreme Court notion m the discretion of tbe jury who try it, and to leave the question of costs to the Judge only when he sits alone, but the proposed limitation o£ a Judge's charge to the jury both m civil and criminal cases is distinctly mischievous, and has been a source of trouble where it has been introduced. Section 2of Mr Buckley's Bill is as follows : — "At every civil or criminal trial before a common or special jury, m the Supreme Court, tho Judge presiding shall, m hia 'charge to the jury, carefully explain to them all points of law affecting the case under trial ; aud on request of either party to the case, or of any juror, shall present the facts of the case to them, as appearing from the evideuce, without comment; he shall then direct them that, whilst bouud to accept the law as laid down by him, they aro the exclusive judges of all questions of fact. If, after retiring to consider their verdict, the jury desire any information as to the evidence given m the case, or on any point of law, the Judge shall give such information without comment." We can see no objection whatever t^ the Judge's comment on the evidence, and tho practice is of the greatest service m the interests of justice. The jury are not bound to take the opinion of the Judge as to questions of faot.but intelligent comuientoften serves as a useful guide. We notice that Mr Downie Stewart, who is opposed to the Bill, has curried a motion that it be referred to the Law Societies. We predict that they will all report unfavourably with regard to Section 2, and the Wellington Society have already written to Mr Downie Stewart m that strain. They say; — "Tho Council of tbe society, having had before them for consideration the Supreme Court Act Amendment Bill, 1891, beg respectfully to submit for the consideration of Parliament (1) that tho proposed provisions of section 2 aro a complete reversal of the system of procedure which has obtained m the courts of law iv England from tbe earliest days down to tho present timo ; (2) that juries accept and receive assistance from the Judge m trials of complicated questions of fact ; (3) that the reports of cases m the courts of the American States, whioh have adopted a similar provision, provo that new trials are of constant occurence on the ground of comment by the Judge, it being found m practice almost impossible for an intelligent Judge when stating tho facts to the jury to fuil to indicate by some expressions tho effect Which the evidence for one aide or the other must properly have." The council of tbo society ulso report unfavourably on the provision as to tho jury fixing the costs. The grounds are that the provision " would be found unworkable m practice. It is not possible for a jury to estimate by what takes placo m court what muy be the labour and expense incurred inlprocuring and preparing statements of evidence and other necessary proceedings preliminary to tho trial."