R
2
this country), if-as appeared to be likely-no one in the Colony who was present when Maresse-Smith gave evidence before the Commission was able or willing to prove what he said.
That it was assumed that the actual finding of the Commission upon the facts and in particular paragraph 102 of the Commissioners' Report would, in any event, be deemed to be irrelevant. That in the 1887 edition of his Digest of the Law of Evidence the late Sir James Stephen expressed a similar opinion (Part I.; Chapter IV., Article 14, footnote) with regard to the finding of the Jamaica Commission in Mr. Eyre's Case in 1867.
That the evidence of Maresse-Smith would be found on pp. 757-766 of the volume containing the Minutes of the Proceedings of the Commission. That reports of the speeches which he delivered on the 14th and 21st of March were printed in the pamphlet entitled "The History of the Port-of-Spain Water Question."
That he was to request us to take his letter and its enclosures into our con- sideration and, in view of the pressing nature of its subject matter, to favour the Secretary of State as soon as possible with our report upon the following questions:-
(1.) Is the evidence given by Maresse-Smith before the Commission legally admissible against him in a prosecution for instigating the riot?
-
(2.) If admissible, would it be expedient and according to legal practice to make use of such evidence in such a prosecution?
(3.) If the answer to the two first questions is in the affirmative, would the evidence given by Maresse-Smith before the Commission constitute, together with the other available evidence mentioned in the papers, substantial evidence upon which a jury ought reasonably to convict?
(4.) Generally, what course should the Colonial legal authorities adopt as to prosecuting Maresse-Smith, and what further steps ought they to take in order to procure evidence against him?
We have taken the matter into our consideration, and in obedience to your commands, have the honour to
(1.) Yes.
Report-
(2.) We see no legal objection to making use of such evidence in a prosecu- tion of Mr. Maresse-Smith, and we do not think that there is anything on grounds of general principle or practice to render it inexpedient.
(3.) We think so.
•
(4.) We do not feel that we are in a position to advise upon the policy of The Law Officers of the Colony can alone prosecuting Mr. Maresse-Smith.
properly form an opinion as to the probability of securing a conviction, and as to the results to the administration of law in the Colony of a failure to obtain a conviction.
37828
No. 203.
(CEYLON.)
LAW OFFICERS to 'COLONIAL OFFICE.
[Proposal to remit to a Colony for trial actions brought in England for wrongs alleged to have been committed in that Colony.]
SIR,
Royal Courts of Justice,
October 13, 1903. WE were honoured with the commands of the Secretary of State signified in Mr. Lucas's letter of the 26th September last, stating that he was directed to transmit to us the enclosed despatch from the Governor 25 August, 1903.
of Ceylon with regard to the case of " Wijenaike v. Ridge- way," together with the pleadings which had been delivered in connection with that suit, and to request us to take the papers into our consideration, and favour the Secretary of State with our views as to the proposal made by the Governor in the eleventh paragraph of his despatch that, when actions are brought in this country for wrongs alleged to have been committed in a Colony, the Judges in England should be authorised to remit the case for trial to the Colony, where the cause of action arose, whenever it is shown that it could be more conveniently tried there.
We have taken the matter into our consideration, and, in obedience to your commands, have the honour to
Report-
That we do not think the proposal made by the Governor in the eleventh para- graph of his despatch is feasible. It would alter a fundamental principle of our law which, although it may cause hardships in certain cases, is essential for enforc- ing rights of action which have arisen abroad. Where the plaintiff is resident abroad the defendant is not wholly without protection, as the English Court can oblige the plaintiff to give security for costs before proceeding with his action.
We have, &c.,
The Right Honourable
The Secretary of State for the Colonies.
R. B. FINLAY.
EDWARD CARSON.
1
The Right Honourable
We have, &c.,
R. B. FINLAY, EDWARD CARSON.
The Secretary of State for the Colonies.
25 Wt 664 10/03 D & R
5
16376
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 885
15 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
1