Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, FEB. 15, 1898. In the Name of Justice.

Manawatu Herald, 15 February 1898, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. TUESDAY, FEB. 15, 1898. In the Name of Justice.

Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state of persuasion, religious and political, is the eup posed foundation upon which our laws are built, but those experienced in their working could point to hundreds of instances where wealth and influence has defeated right and poverty. Should this state of affairs remain? or can wo, by providing instances of such injustice do something to set the minds of the public thinking and thus pave the way to an alteration by which the poor man may have equal chances of either prosecution and defence as those havS who are belter endowed with this world's gords ? We possess not that power which we would have wished for this battle and exposure, but feeling that, as one man ha* suffered, so many more in a like position may hbve to suffer, we con«. aider it is our duty to place indisputable facts before our readers. The one clear fact is, the law is not tqnal to all. As we have a case In fore us that has lately occupied the attention of the Courts we will set out the paiticulars and from a perusal of which it will be evident that the statement we have made, that the law is not equal to all, is fully borne out. It is unnecessary j to harras the relatives by using the name of the accused, or of any | person in the case, and we will i designate the accußed as one A. B. I It appears that the accused had, as usual, a preliminary bearing at the Stipendiary Magistrate's Court and there he was committed for trial at the Supreme Court. Whether A, B. was defended by Counsel in the lower court we are unaware, but he refrained from calling any evidence in his favour. Prior to being put upon his *rial Counsel was engaged and preparations made for the defence, the first step being the subpoening of witnesses. It must be remarked here that A. B. is a poor man and probably had done wrong, but the beautiful fiction exists that every man is, in law. considered to be innocent until his offence is proved. A. B'p. Counsel therefore s ent out subpoena's to six person?, tvo of whom however only appeared. That he had the risht and pnwpr *o is*ue those documents must bf> taken as granted as they were gsued under the !ppnl pp.al of the Supreme Court by the Deputy Registrar and were in the following form : — " SubpoenaCriminal, Victoria, by the Grace of G)d of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, to ; Greeting : You and eac'i of you are hereby commanded, that, all excuses , being laid a?ide, you and each of you be and appear in your own proper person before His Honor Sir James Prendergast, Knight Chief Justice of our Supreme Court of New Zealand, at the Courthouse at Wellington on the — day of noxt. at 10 o'clock in the forenoon, to give evidence on tha trial of the Queen on the prosecution of — - — — agaius' A. B. for and thereafter to attend from day to day until you shall be lawfully discharged from attendance. And heroin fail not, under the penal y of One Hundred Pounds upon each of you. Witness : •Sir James Prendergast, Knight Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of our Colony of New Zealand the — day of — 189." Then in the smallest letters possible is added a note that " this subpoena is issued on behalf of the prosecution " or defeaoe. To a w tnesa these small lines are of the inmost interest as it makes all the difference to him whether he ap pears, in criminal matters, on behalf of tha prosecution or of the defence. If he ha? been summoned for the proseoution he can rest assured that his expenses will be paid, but if called by the defendant, who may happen to be a poor man, ha i3 sure to find that the expenses will have to be found from his own pocket. Such being the case can it surprise anyone that a strong objeotion ia shown by witnesses to attend on the bidding of even fo great a personage as ih n Chief Justice, when it entails up in them the heavy coat of travelling and board and lodging whilst in Wc?l lingtcn, with no prospect of having this outlay refunded ? Witnesses do | strongly object, and in the case of { A. B. we there found the names of four men mentioned who though well to do, chose to ignore the order for attendance, and also to ignore the position th*>ir non attendance might have placed the accused. These witnesses were called aud did not appear, and, keeping in mind the wording of the subpoena, it was a surprise to hnar Counsel for tb.» prospcution say " there is one. way to get him — pay his expenses." Here appears at once where the poor man is placed at a disadvantage, for how can he pay his witnesses' expense* whpn h« has not the money ? A. B's. Counsel fought the matter well for his client as he said " hi) had offered to satisfy the Crown Prosecutor thar. the witnesses were nec-siry," bir the Crown Prosecutor had declined to do anything and had referred him to the Justice Department. Counsel wrote and received the following

reply :— " I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of this day's date asking the government to defray the expenses of certain witnesses for the defeue • in the case of Regina v. A. 8., and in reply, am directed 6y the Minister of justice to inform you that he regrets that he i* unable to comply with your r< q lest, as no provision has been made for the payment of witnesses for the defence iu criminal cases." It wap thus It ft to the witnesses for the defence whether they a 1 -.ended at their own expense ous of deference to rbo order of the Chief Justice and out oi proper feeling of one's duty to one's neighbour, ct for the m to treat a man's liberty of only money value >nd in the absence of the ranchloved dollars, to risk the threatened fine of One Hundred Pounds. This fine appears to be viewed in much the same fashion as the old fable tells us that the cry of " wolf " was, it apparently being but a eound signifying nothing, and added, perhaps simply to help impecunions accused in getting witnesses, and if j «o it would appear about the only j leniency the law. exercises in the favour of a poor man. This com j o'etes the case, fo far ; the absent witnesses were ignored; their con j tempt of the order of (he Clr; f Justica was parsed over, the presiding Judge simply stating that " if thrir evidence was material, it might be a matter for consideration." Thus upon the chances as to whether their attendance wa a material or not, about which the Counsel for the accused and the judge could bo the only parties able to have knowledge of, a witness may keep away. If this is correct the wording f f the subpoena's could be altered to the manifest advantage of per?,on3 on whom they are served. Th* Crown needs no restriction of witnesses, all who are subpoem d are paid, and this knowledge undoubtedly tends to secure them the information they need in a prosecution, and rightly, so, but the difficulty a poor man ia placed in also is made most clear, on the opposite grounds, that much evidence that might be of service is withheld because the person possessed of it would, did he make it known, have to loose his time and his money. Silenoe on his part may rhu3 be golden to him, but it miy also be the mean3 of the poor man losing his liberty. Therefore in the name of Justice some alteration is necessary.