(d) Are the periodical volumes of statutes accompanied by (1) an index and table of contents, (2) a table showing the effect on previous legislation?

These pamphlets contain (1) an index and table of contents, but not (2) a table showing the effect on previous legislation. However, a consolidating or amending Act usually contains a section or marginal note or appendix declaring, referring to, or showing the extent of the repeal or amendment of sections of or entire former Acts.

(e) What collective editions (if any) of the statute law of the colony have been published, and whether by the Government or private enterprise? Are these or any of them periodical? Do such editions comprise those Acts of the United Kingdom in force in the colony?

The last published collective edition is the one of 1877. It was prepared by the then Attorney-General (Sir George Anderson), and carried out under the authority of the Governor by virtue of a special Act. There are not periodical reprintings; but a new edition is now in contemplation, and will be prepared by the Chief Justice of the Colony acting under the authority of the Governor. The edition of 1877, and the one to be prepared, will contain-but not in extenso-all Imperial statutes in force in the colony. (f) Is there any edition of "Selected Statutes" corresponding to Chitty's "Statutes of Practical Utility"?

There is no edition of selected statutes of the colony.

(g) How are private Acts published?

There is no distinction between public and private Acts. They are published together in the same pamphlet, and are numbered consecutively. Private Acts refer almost exclusively to religious corporations and trading companies.

REVISION OF Statutes.

(a) Have any steps been taken for the revision and expurgation of the statute law, whether periodically or otherwise? What machinery (if any) exists for this purpose?

No steps have been taken for a revision and expurgation periodically. The only instances of revision are those authorised by special Acts resulting in the editions of 1850, 1862, and 1877. A revision and expurgation will take place for the purposes of the contemplated new edition.

(b) Is there any edition of the "Revised Statutes" showing those actually in force? If so, under what authority is it prepared and published, and what is the date of the latest edition? Is it published at periodical intervals, or how otherwise? Are the contents arranged alphabetically, chronologically, or on any other principle?

The only published edition of the statute law of the colony is the one of 1877. All laws since then have been printed in pamphlet form at the end of each annual session. The new edition will contain all statutes in force up to a certain date, which will probably be the end of the next

annual session of the Legislature. The edition of 1877 is arranged subjectively, and contains a Chronological Table, a Schedule of the Imperial Statutes extending to the Colony, a Schedule of the Statutes of the Colony, and an Analytical Index. The same arrangement will be adopted in the new edition.

INDEXING OF STATUTE LAW.

If so, on what

Does it include

Is there any general index to the statute law of the colony? principle is it arranged, and after what interval is it revised? both public and private Acts or ordinances and the statutes of the United Kingdom Is it accompanied by any table showing how What is the date of the latest edition?

which are in force in the colony? each statute has been dealt with?

The only general index of statute law, which includes both public and private Acts and Imperial statutes, is the one contained in the edition of 1877. It is arranged both chronogically and alphabetically.

CONSOLIDATION AND CODIFICATION.

(a) What steps have been taken to consolidate the whole or particular parts of the statute law, or to codify any branches of the law? Does any machinery exist for the purpose? Is the work now in progress ?

No attempt has been made at a general consolidation or codification, but numerous Acts have consolidated particular parts of the statute law.

(b) What "codes" are now in force in the colony? When and by whom were they prepared, and on what materials are they based?

The most recent consolidation and the only codification is in connection with the constituting of a Supreme Court and in respect of the law relating to magistrates. The Supreme Court Act is modelled on the Judicature Acts of England, and the Magistrates Act after English and Colonial statutes. The work was carried out in 1895 and 1896 by Sir Charles Walpole, the then, and Sir Ormond D. Malcolm, the now, Chief Justice of the colony.

SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION.

What official or other machinery exists for the preparation, passing, or promulgation of measures of subordinate legislation such as rules or orders made by the Governor or a minister or department under the express authority of statute or ordinance? Is there any and what collection of or index to such subordinate measures?

Various Acts authorise the making of rules by (1) the Governor in Council and (2) the Chief Justice and the various Boards-e.g., works, health, pilotage, etc., etc.-for submission to the Governor in Council, These are published in the Official Gazette, but there is no collection of or index to them.

January 1899.

THE DEFENCE OF PRISONERS.

[Contributed by T. R. BRIDGWATER, ESQ.]

THE General Council of the Bar has recently passed a resolution "that it is in the interests of all prisoners (considering their interests alone) that they should be defended by counsel." Such a procedure is not unknown in other countries, in the British Colonies, and in Scotland; but it would, if carried into effect, be a novelty in English criminal courts. All accused persons in England having sufficient means can, it is true, be defended by A prisoner arraigned in court has even the right to claim the services of the most distinguished counsel present by payment of a small nominal fee. Prisoners without any means are sometimes gratuitously defended by counsel, and judges often request counsel to defend undefended prisoners.1 Probably no judge fails to see that a prisoner charged before him with a capital offence has counsel allotted for the defence. Such a custom, observed when grave offences are in question, might well be extended to all offences. This is the proposition which the resolution of the Bar Council affirms, without, however, pointing out the mode by which the desired end is to be attained.

It is not the purpose of the present article to supply such omission or to define the best method of carrying out the resolution passed: this may best be left to such separate organisations of the Bar as the circuits and sessions. Nor is it intended here to express any opinion before what tribunals prisoners should be defended, whether before summary tribunals or only before tribunals charged with the trials of indictable offences, though it might fairly be said that in the interests, not only of prisoners, but of the administration of justice, and therefore of the whole community, every person charged with an offence of sufficient importance to be prosecuted by an advocate ought to be defended by one. The design of this article is to show that the proposed innovation is a more or less recognised system already at work in foreign countries, in some of the British colonies, and in Scotland.

Even then, as Sir Fitzjames Stephen once said, "is it not very hard upon a poor prisoner that he should have no better means of obtaining counsel than the request of the judge at the last moment to some junior barrister?"

The treatment of accused persons in England in former times is a dark chapter in our legal annals. That such persons down to quite recent times were not allowed to have counsel to defend them at all is no revelation to lawyers, though it may be to some laymen. This barbarous rule (equalled only for irrationality by a similar rule, which required all criminal trials to end in one day) deprived prisoners accused of any capital offence, except treason, of the assistance of counsel unless some question of law arose which it was necessary to discuss. In felony trials, by permission of judges, counsel were allowed to stand beside the prisoner instructing him what questions to ask; but the accused himself had to cross-examine the witnesses. He might not address the judge or jury unless some legal question had arisen. Commenting upon all this, Sir James Stephen says: "From the middle of the eighteenth century to our own times there has been but little change in the character of criminal trials. The most remarkable change was the relaxation gradually of the old rule which deprived prisoners of the assistance of counsel in trials for felony-a practice sprung up the growth of which cannot now be traced, by which counsel was allowed to do everything for a prisoner accused of felony except addressing the jury for him. It was not until 1836 that an Act (6 & 7 Wm. IV., c. 114, S. 1) was passed which allowed prisoners accused of felony to make their full defence by counsel, and so placed all felony trials on the same footing as misdemeanours. Yet one hundred and twenty years earlier Blackstone had acknowledged that there was no plausible reason why the same assistance should not be granted to poor, ignorant, and terror-stricken prisoners in cases affecting their lives, as in cases of petty trespass; or, in other words, why legal assistance should not be allowed in the graver offences of felonies as in the lesser offences of misdemeanours." We have now advanced one step further, in the sense that gratuitous assistance is occasionally directed by our judges to be given to prisoners in grave cases. Why then should not similar assistance be extended to all cases where the liberty of the subject is in question, a defence being before the court?

In England, France, and Germany a criminal case may be disposed of at the preliminary enquiry or first stage. As in England indictments may be preferred where no preliminary enquiry has taken place, so in France a trial may take place without l'instruction. In Germany there is a procedure unfamiliar in England-the examination of the accused in the preliminary enquiry before the magistrate, without the presence of the public prosecutor or the prisoner's counsel.

France. Before the criminal police court the prisoner may be repre sented by an avoué (a solicitor) if accused of an offence not punishable by imprisonment. If an accused person wishes to be defended and cannot afford it, he may, by applying to the Bâtonnier des Avocats, have appointed by him a junior who gives his services gratuitously. The same applies to civil matters, but is much more complicated.

In all cases tried before a jury the prisoner is asked, before the trial, to select a counsel, and failing to do so the president of the court or a judge appointed by him selects a counsel. The counsel must as a general rule be taken from the role of avocats (advocates) or avoués (solicitors) registered in the Court of Appeal of the district; but on the prisoner's application, the president of the court may allow him to be represented by a relative or friend. Counsel is allowed to see all depositions, and is granted an adjournment of the case if he requires it to prepare the defence. The costs of such proceedings ordered by the court are advanced from the Government funds; and the prisoner is ordered to repay them if found guilty and sentenced, if acquitted he is discharged from all responsibility for costs. The counsel, if appointed by the court, is not allowed to refuse the brief, and his fees are paid out of Government funds. A prisoner, therefore, without means secures the services of counsel without payment. It should be recollected that in France all the expenses of a criminal trial, including the prisoner's witnesses, experts, interpreters, are all borne by the court-all but counsel's fees.

Germany.-In Germany there is even greater consideration for the rights of the defence than is shown by the French code. The appointment of a counsel for a prisoner is compulsory from the earliest stage of the proceedings, in all matters which (1) are tried before the Supreme Court at Leipzig, (2) in all matters which have to be tried before a jury, (3) or when the prisoner is deaf or dumb or has not completed his sixteenth year. A prisoner is entitled as of right to have counsel appointed at his option in all matters, other than in those matters above mentioned, where the maximum punishment exceeds five years' penal servitude or imprisonment in a fortress; and also in matters not above mentioned, if urgent and on the prisoner's application. The president of the court (or, if counsel is appointed in the preliminary proceedings, the local judge) selects the counsel from the advocates residing in the places in which the court is situate. There may also be appointed as counsel, a judicial officer, not being a judge, and any person preparing for the legal profession or judicial office having passed the first Government examination. If a prisoner wishes to select his own counsel, other than the counsel appointed for him by the court, he may do so, and the court will order the official counsel's appointment to be revoked. The payment of counsel appointed by the court is the same as in France: the fees are paid from the public funds; if the prisoner is ordered to pay the costs, this does not concern his counsel-he (the counsel) is paid by the public authorities, who in their turn recover as much as they can from the prisoner. Again, in Germany as in France, a prisoner may employ an unqualified person, by consent of the court; but where the appointment of counsel would otherwise have been compulsory-i.e., in Germany-an unqualified person can only act together with a properly qualified person.

Italy. In Italy the appointment of counsel is unnecessary in the case of a