232
letter in this Form
for the double purpose
of pointing out the want of form irregularities in the marine
and
magistrate's proceedings, and of communicating
his
wishes with respect to their revision.
of
the
In the first place, it is to be observed that the Marine Magistrate has treated the case as a civil prosecution between Plaintiff and Defendant; instead of recording it as a prosecution in the name of the Queen against the Prisoner, and then detailing the charge in full.
In the second place, the first witness called is styled the Plaintiff, and most of the other witnesses called forward styled witnesses for the Plaintiff instead of for the Prosecution.
All these witnesses should have been
"called into Court and duly sworn and their evidence afterwards recorded, and it does not appear on the proceedings whether Winchester's examination was upon oath or not. If not, it is obviously necessary that it should have been.
The Prisoner had, I presume, the option
of cross-examining all the witnesses for the Prosecutor, but that fact should have been distinctly stated before each witness was allowed to withdraw,
and it ought also to have been stated that the prisoner was invited
to make
any
defence
and to
call
any
additional
witnesses whom
he thought proper in support of his defence (if he made any).
He should
also
Page 240
Page 241