HALL BEFORE THE APPEAL COURT.

Tuapeka Times, Volume XX, Issue 1334, 16 March 1887, Page 3

HALL BEFORE THE APPEAL COURT.

The Appeal Court gave its judgment in Hall's oase on Saturday morning. The judgment, wh'ch was in writing, was of a some what lengthy character. The opinion was expressed that the learned Judge who tried the case had practically no option in admitting the evidence. No single judge could have taken upon himself to refuse the admission of such evidence. For the reasons stated, the Court were unanimously of opinion that the prisoner ought not to have been convicted. The conviction waa therefore quashed. Universal regret is expressed throughout* the country that such a double-dyed scoundrel should escape the just penalty of his , crimes by a mere legal quibble or technicality. The Wellington "Post" accepts the judgment of the Court of Appeal as laid down, but says that it is not according to common sense or justice. It calls on Parliament to amend the law, so that such scandals may be impossible in the future. In a civil case points overruled would only mean a new trial, while in criminal cases the criminal escapes altogether. — The Auckland " Star " says :— " The Court of Appeal having quashed his conviction for the murder of Captain Cain, the effects so far as a punishment is concerned is the same as though Hall had been found not guilty ; but the effect to the popular mind is very different. The conviction remains that Hall is one of the vilest scoundrels unhung, that he was truly and honestly found guilty of killing his father-in-law, and that the world would have been well rid of such a danger -us member of society. Added to this there is now a vague sense of distrust — a feeling that our criminal law is but a weak net whose meßhes can be broken by a big fish, and that its operation is not nearly so effioient and infallible as it ought to be. Had the verdict resulted in the immediate letting loose of a convicted wife-poisoner, we can fancy what an indignant protest would have been raised against the decision. The possibility disclosed in thia decision of a proved murderer being let loose upon society is not a pleasing one to contemplate and suggests that our tendencies in dealing with heinous oriminals are too like those in vogue in the United States, where Judge Lynch has to do all the hanging,"