CO129-475 - Governor Sir Stubbs & Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1922 [5-7] — Page 100

74

to avoid prejudice.

At one stage, thinking that "very

I

material" was too strong, I added that I did not say that

the proposed evidence was by any means conclusive.

also admitted that I knew of no precedent in my experience

for the admission of the evidence.

21 Para. 42(h); It quite escaped me that Mr. Larkins

was in the same firm as a member of the jury. Mr. Jenkin !

did not draw my attention to the fact when I informed him

before hand of my intended application and of the substance

of Mr. Larkina's evidence.

22 Para. 42(j): The Chief Justice put the evidence on

both sides, and pointed out that the two stories were in-

consistent.

23. Para. 42(K): My recollection is that the chief

Justice did refer to the alleged inconsistencies in the

Crown evidence.

Zu Para. 42(m): I cannot recollect what the Chief

Justice did read out, but Mr. Jenkin offered no suggestion

of any kind on the summing up at the time.

1st May,

1922.

Attorney General.