& their
OL
18
-14-
I suggest that they must have entered the Library
(the retiring room) with bluired and confused minds as to
X.
how they should apply the judgment.
judge rightly directed the jury on my
on the other points.
I think that the trial
8th point, but not
I now propose to go through the mumming-uy.
The trial judge doubted the wisdom of the course
which he adopted.
Kap.C.J: I did not doubt the wisdom of thecourse, and I
do not now doubt it. I say this to avoid mis understanding.
It should, I think, be pointed out that the sun ing-up
followed immediat ly xt on the sum ing-up for the defence,
and that the defence had avowedly attached great importance
to the last word.
Jenkin: It is impossible to say that if this evidence
b'd been excluded the jury must have come to the same
conclusion.
A. v. Baguley.
v. Renton.
R. v. Fox.
A. v. Hall,
& admitted
Sheldon:
I dispute from the beginning that this was a difficult
or complicated case, though it was long.
In the appeal no great principle is involved and no
great decision has to be taken. Such evidence has frequently
X. been omitted.
I wish to put a concrete frat: Evidence of different
crimes with one end in view, that end being the crime with
which the Frisoner is charged, is always admiɛsible.
For
example, "A" com:its a burglary and steals a pistol: he
commits a second burglary: the pistol is found at his house,