The Noitgedacht Murder. 125 



circumstances before the Court that the prisoners would not only be 

 benefited by the order as contended by the Crown, but that they would 

 be prejudiced thereby. The application was supported by facts and he 

 was not asked to proceed upon theory or on conjecture, but was asked to 

 deal only with certain facts. Those facts had not been traversed. He 

 thought those facts were eloquent and convincing, and he had no doubt 

 whatever that he should make the order. That order he made and he 

 made it — he thought it would be hardly necessary to say — entirely on the 

 circumstances alleged in the application and in the interests of the 

 prisoners themselves. 



Delay en Assigning Counsel. 

 Some reference had been made — this was purely a personal matter 

 which he took the opportunity of mentioning because he had felt the 

 same way himself — in an article " On Dit " in " The Tribune " that he 

 caused some hardship, possibly contributing to inconvenience and perhaps 

 injustice by assigning counsel at the last moment. He only wished to 

 say— he was not at pains to defend himself from allegations made in the 

 public press, but it being an important thing he must refer to it — that 

 the very minute the proper steps were taken to bring to his notice that 

 prisoners desired counsel be dealt with them at once. He had felt that a 

 great deal of time was allowed to elapse between the time prisoners on 

 the charge of murder were committed for trial and the time when their 

 representations in the matter got to him. A prisoner might be com- 

 mitted sometimes three weeks before the sessions and there came at the 

 last moment in answer to a series of questions put to him (the prisoner) 

 that he had not a lawyer, and the promptest action was taken. He 

 merely made the remark that he was ready to assign counsel the very 

 minute he was asked to do so. 



Difficulty if Assigning Counsel. 

 The Attorney General stated that the reasons for the delay in that 

 case was that His Honour had the greatest difficulty in getting counsel, 

 and one even withdrew from the defence on the very morning of the 

 trial. He would like to mention one matter which did not affect the 

 motion. It had been said that the prisoners in the case had not a right 

 to peremptory challenge. The right had been preserved to them and to 

 other persons committed before the 20th July. His Honour had tried a 

 case only the previous day in which the right was exercised. 



A Trial at Bar. 



His Honour said he saw on the record an application for the trial of 

 the matter before three Judges of the Supreme Court, that application, 

 he supposed, being under the criminal procedure. 



The Attorney General remarked that he was glad to find that to a 

 certain extent his mind was working no the same line with that of 

 counsel who spoke first, declarin that he did not object to a trial at 

 Bar. 



