LAW OF EVIDENCE BILL.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2006, 29 July 1880, Page 2

LAW OF EVIDENCE BILL.

[Br Telbgbaph.] IFBOM OITB OWlf OOHBBSPOITDBIfT.] WELLINGTON, July 28. Mr Stewart has introduced a Bill to amend, the law of evidence. The Bill provides that the following confessions and communications be privileged, and not admissible in evidence in any civil or criminal proceeding, except with the express consent of the person alleged to have made such confession or communication ; all confessions made to ministers of the Gospel or a priest of any denomination in & professional character, in accordance with the rules or practice of such denomination; all communications made to a physician or surgeon in a professional character by patients; all confessions made by any person whilst in custody of the polica officers, unless made in the presence of a J.P., providing that nothing shall protect any com municalion made for any criminal purposes. Every person accused of any offence, indiotable or not, shall at his own request, but not otherwise, be a competent witness for or against himself at the trial for such offence, but every such person giving evidence on hia own behalf shall be liable to be cross-examined on any matter, though not arising out of the examination in chief, provided that so far aa possible the examination relates to the credit of such person. The court may limit such, cross • examination as it thinks proper, provided," also that the refusal of any such person to give evideace shall not in any manner prejudice him or be subject to comment. In all criminal proceedings whatsoever b gainst any person the husband or wife of such person shall be competent and compellable to

zive evidence for or against such person; provided that no husband or wife shall give evidence of or disclose any communications made by the one to the other of them during their marriage. From the passing of this Act no oivil remedy which any person may have against any other person for any act or omission shall be suspended or in any way affected by the fact that such act or omission amounts to a criminal offence ; but, if upon any oivil proceeding it appears to the Court that the aot or omission for whioh the action is brought amounts to a criminal offence, the Court may take the same measures for prosecution as authorised by law with regard to persons who appear to the Court to have committed perjury.