43

I.—lβ

begin with the whole world, and gradually reduce the limits as the circumstances of the murder are revealed. Mr. Jellicoe: Is this a fairly accurate report of your address on that point in the New Zealand Times ? —I think you had better take my own words from the statement which I gave in yesterday. I have not read the newspaper report since the trial. Mr. Jellicoe: Having regard to the fact that the prisoner was a foreigner, do you consider that such a statement as you made to the jury was fair ? —I consider I would have been grossly failing in my duty had I not pointed out that fact, as every material point must be of importance. My answer to your question is, that I do not know what you consider fair, but I do know what I considered to be my duty as Crown Prosecutor, and I would have been grossly wanting in my duty to the country had I abstained from calling attention to any circumstance. Mr. Jellicoe : And did you criticise the evidence of Bradford ?—Yes. Mr. Jellicoe : Was that because he had formed a theory of his own which was adverse to the theory of the Crown?—He was absolutely reckless in his statements. Mr. Jellicoe : Why you said, " The armourer was honest enough, but he was an enthusiast and a partisan. He had formed a theory of his own against that set up by the Crown." Were these your words ? —Those are like my words. Mr. Jellicoe : The evidence of Lee, the carrier, was favourable to Chemis ?—No. Mr. Jellicoe : Did you say in summing up that Lee's evidence was not worth serious consideration?— With regard to the man running up the road, I think I did say so. I repeat it. I think so now. This refers only to the portion of the evidence about the man running up the road. The jury were able to judge of Lee's manner as well as I was. Mr. Jellicoe : You are aware that neither Chemis or his wife at the trial were competent witnesses ?—I am. I referred to that fact. I also called attention to the fact that the children were not called. The law did not then allow the wife to be called. "Itis a rule often as good for the prisoner as bad for him that he and his wife should be kept out of the box, but in this case, where there are children of an age quite able to give evidence, it cannot but be significant that they are not in the box. They must know whether he was in the house or not at the crucial hour." [Address of Mr. Bell to Jury.] Mr. Jellicoe : What was the age of prisoner's eldest child at the time you made that statement? —Nine years or ten years. The Chairman (to Mrs. Chemis, who was present) : What age was the child, Mrs. Chemis ?— Eight years old the March before. Mr. Jellicoe (to Mr. Bell) : Your comment, then, referred to children under nine?— Yes. Mr. Jellicoe: With reference to Norman. Norman before the Magistrate on the perjury charge in his evidence admitted that he did not tell the Judge on the murder charge all that he knew. That he did not tell about Bowles. Did that statement surprise you?—No, not at all. He stops in the middle of a sentence. Mr. Jellicoe : Have you the evidence of Norman as originally briefed to you ?—I asked for it before the Justices, but did not get it. It was a question about footprints that Norman was going to refer to when he was stopped in the middle of a sentence. He was saying that he had seen footprints tending in the direction of Chemis's house, and that he mentioned it to Bowles, but did not mention it in the Supreme Court. Mr. Jellicoe (reading from Norman's published evidence): He said, " I wrote out my evidence and gave it to Benjamin, all except what I knew about Bowles. I did not tell the Judge all that was in that statement." Mr. Bell : You let him stop there and passed on. I left it there. I knew how the sentence would have ended. Mr. Jellicoe : Pardon me, if you refer to his evidence you will find he did not stop, he went on giving evidence. Do you recollect how many jurors you challenged ? Mr. Bunny objected to your challenging? —He objected to my challenging at all. The Chairman : It seems we are again getting somewhat into a criticism of what took place at the trial. Mr. Jellicoe : Then I shall ask no further questions. The Chairman : Is there anything outside of that evidence, Mr. Jellicoe, that you wished to bring before the Committee ? Mr. Jellicoe : I do not know what course my friend, Mr. Gully, proposes to take. Mr. Bell : The question is, what course does the chief of police intend to take ? The Chairman :I am not sure that I put the question in those words before the Committee. I did, however, mention the matter to Colonel Hume privately, and the Premier also. Inspector Thomson said it was unnecessary, and did not intend to summon Benjamin. Colonel Hume said the police did not intend to retain counsel. Mr. Bell: Is it Colonel Hume's desire that the police should not be represented, or is it the wish of the police ? Mr. Jellicoe : Mr. Thomson told me he had consulted with Campbell. Mr. Bell: lam not able to make any statement, but I feel that there is something else. The case, to enable this Committee to come to the best conclusion, to have the matter brought fully before them, is not complete. There is an able counsel on one side, and my friend and partner on the other, on behalf of the Crown. You have done all you can, lam aware ; I can only regret that you do not ask Colonel Hume if these men should not be separately represented. The Chairman: lasked Colonel Hume, and to the best of my recollection he said that they were not intending to call any witnesses. That was in reference to Mr. Thomson, and since that I have felt in a very curious position, because I thought Mr. Gully would defend all connected with the Crown.