5
be remanded. Witnesses, however,
• lawyer will remember the difference it makes rather to hear witnesses examined and see their demeanour from merely reading hurried notes of their evidence.
As to the 4th Convict, I have only to say
that the Court is of opinion that the prisoner, 16 years,
flogged.
was under he would not have been
and that the order of security has been the usual means of bringing before the Governor cases where the magistrate thought a prisoner should be sent but was not of the
I may assume, that if the
53
236
Attorney General's attention had been called to Section 22 of Ordinance No 10 of 1844, he probably would not have expressed doubt as to the legality of calling in a person for security when after conviction like now.
Signed J. Russell
Police Magistrate
5
be reanded. Whis Euthaney, however,
ivo
• lawyer will remember the dif.
ference it rather to hear witripes
and
evarnined and
sue their demeanan
from merely reading hurried notes
of then evidence
As to the 4th Cemvictim. I.
have mly to say
that the Cont
of opinion that the priomer.
16
years,
flogged.
лать
was under
he would not have been
and that the order of security
has been the noual
mem
bringing before the Governor
of
where the magistrate thought a
puismer
Joday
shined be sent but
of the
I may abonne, that if the
53
236
Attorney General's attention had been called to Section 22 of Ordinance No 10
of 1844, he probably umuld not have exprefsed dubt as to the legality of calling in a prerom for seemity when alemviction liske plow.
Grigned J. Rufell
Polie Magistrate
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.