15
Jenking
I claim that I have the right to attack the sum¬ing-up
The
by reason of section 78 of Ordinance 9 of 1899.
language is almost identical with the t of the Criminal
Appeal Act.
The sun ing-up discloses a misdirection on
a question of 1. The second point is that a mis-
direction on a question of law is a question of law and
is therefore referable to this court. On such reference
I am entitled to discuss the surning-up generally, on
the point of whether a substantisk miscarriage of
justice has a curred.
R. v. Taylor (1875) 2 C.G.R. 147. di sdirection
on point of law reserved.
k. v. Meyer (1908) 1 c. c. . 10. Misdirection
on law is a point of law.
My only point is that there has been a substantial
miscarriage of justice, assuming Potter's argument to
be correct.
To Kemp C.JA
Sheldon: I do not know yet how much of the Zimmern
and Christie evidence is objected to.
Jenkin: The duties of the trial judge are:
1.
2.
In any case other then a simple one it is the
duty of the judge to direct the jury on both
the law and tue facts.
If there is a mass of evidence it is the duty
of the judge to sift it and put it to the
jury in such a way that they will appreciate it.
3. The jury art entitled to that aɛsistance from
the judge in order to avoid their being lulled
into a miscarriage of justice on their part.
The speeches of Counsel cannot relieve the
Judge of that duty.
4.