The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE. TUESDAY, JAN. 17, 1893.

Waikato Times, Volume XL, Issue 3208, 17 January 1893, Page 2

The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE.

TUESDAY, JAN. 17, 1893.

Hqual anil exact justice to all men, Of whatsoever state or persuasion, religious, or political.

This Ministry havo refused to interfere in the Oliemis case iu the direction of recommending the Governor to remit the life sentence passed upon him. It will be remembered (hat this caso was considered by a Parliamentary Committee during last session, and that the committee pursued tho unprecedented course of interviewing and taking the evidence of the convict, with the result that the ease was recommended to the consideration 'of the Ministers, The chairman went so far as to express the opinion that the man was not guilty of the murder of which lie had been convicted, after a careful trial and able defence. Of course every man whether he be a private individual or member of a Parliamentary Committee is perfectly justified in forming an opinion upon any and every subject, but when acting in the latter position lie should feel that his right to express it is under certain circumstances limited, This was clearly Mr Mills' position when dealing with the petition under review, neither lie nor tho committee were called upon to do more than recommend that the ease should or should not bo reconsidered by Ministers, They quite overstepped the mark when they in fact constituted themselves a Court of Criminal Appeal, and thus proceeded to judge the caso on the ex parte statement of the prisoner concerned. A statement made after all tho evidence was before him, and the comments of counsel and the judge were at his disposal to guide him in formulating his statement as to establish his innocence to the satisfaction of the committee, or at least to raise doubts, which did not exist on reading the proceedings at the trial, with the certain result that a reconsideration of his case would be recommended. It is true that this does little harm beyond giving Ministers some trouble, and in public estimation reducing the chances of the findings of juries, followed by the sentences of judges being acted upon, As we pointed out on a former occasion when alluding to this ease, in the event of a man being sentenced to death, he would most certainly be hanged before a committee of the House could deal with the caso, unless as in the present instance the Governor intervened, a step he would most certainly not be influenced to take by the fact that a petition was in existence awaiting the meeting of Parliament to be presented. Ho and his advisers would then as now only be guided by tho facts as presented to their minds and the convict would accordingly hang or not hang. Tho position arrived at is that the murderer whose sentence has been commuted has the right to petition Parliament, whereas the man who has failed to get such commutation has no such right. It would of course be a dangerous precedent

to establish that under any conditions a man is debarred the rijjht of petition. The right, however, imposes upon Parliament the necessity of refusing to interfere, in matters with which of necessity they can have but very small capacity to deal. Appeals from sentences of the Courts must always be of this nature. They must' certainly be so in all cases where the question to be considered is the guilt or non • guilt of a convict, There is another case which has exercised the minds of the public lately, that of Powell, who was convicted of illegal practices and sentenced to ten years' penal servitude. In his case there is no pretence that he was not guilty of the crime, but the weight of the sentence is, by some, considered excessive, and a petition to the Governor that it may be mitigated is in course of- signature. If this fails, no doubt oue of the Petitions Committees will be called upon to deal with the case next session. It is true that such a committee is more competent to judge as to the excessiveness or otherwise of the sentence than they would be as to his guilt or otherwise. After all tliey form a most incompetent tribunal, as they have only the power to recommend, and their recommendation may be dissented from by Ministers, as has been that of the committee in the Chemis easel , The object of the above remarks is to lead opinion in the direction of establishing a Criminal Appeal Court for the consideration of cases in which there may be doubt as to the right conclusions having been arrived at; to settle any points of law that may appear doubtful, arid to revise the sentences of judges with the- power to increase or mitigate their severity, and in the eventof fresh evidence in any case being forthcoming to give it due consideration, There would, of course, have to be safeguards that the practice of the court should be so laid down that the evil as it exists in the United States of criminal eases, more particularly where capital punishment is involved, taking months to settle. Such a court would relieve the Governor and Ministers of much anxiety, and would certainly be more competent than they to arrive at correct conclusions. It would further render the hope futile that by petitioning Parliament the reversal of a sentence could be possible, If such a court existed committees would, as a natural result, report that they had no recommendation to make, unless, as is extremely unlikely, a case should arise which was a scandal on our administration of justice. The prerogative of mercy, which at present nominally vests in • the Governor, but in fact in his Ministers, would not be removed, and would no doubt be exercised,, in nearly every case, in accordance with the recommendation. of the court.