A View of Canadian Law. 301 
ture Act of 1881 very nearly proved the death of some of the old equity 
men and common law men also in the Province of Ontario; but that was 
nothing to the dismay which spread in the ranks of the lawyers who 
practised in the criminal Courts, when the Code of 1892 was passed. 
The distinction between felonies and misdemeanors was abolished. 
Every crime was made an indictable offence. All the beautiful little 
pitfalls and holes that old criminal lawyers used to know so well about in 
indictments, etc., are filled up and done away with. Parliament provided 
that the indictment might be in the simplest form, so long as it set out 
and explained to the alleged criminal what it was he was charged with. 
If the indictment used the words of the statute that was enough. For 
instance, an indictment for murder is never more than three lines long, 
and it would read like this, ‘“‘The jury for our Lord the King present 
that John Smith on the 7th of September, 1911, at the City of Toronto, 
murdered Tom Jones.” That is all there is about it. There are no 
pitfalls in the criminal law. 
If a person is charged with a crime, an investigation is made by a 
magistrate, sometimes by a coroner. Under the old practice, of course, 
the finding at the coroner’s inquest could be laid before a petit jury. 
This is no longer our law. Everything of a criminal nature which is to 
be tried by the High Court comes before a grand jury. The accused 
first comes before a magistrate ; he has a right to have his full defence 
gone into, witnesses called and examined ; and if at the conclusion the 
magistrate thinks there is no case, he is dismissed—although the prose- 
cutor may demand to be bound over to prosecute, in which case he 
comes before the next Court of competent jurisdiction. If the magis- 
trate thinks a case has been made out, he commits for trial 
Save in the case of treason, murder and a few others, within twenty- 
four hours of a person being committed to jail he must be brought before 
the County Court Judge. The County Court Judge is a Judge of, 
inferior jurisdiction, but he must have been a barrister for ten years 
before his appointment and ought to know as much law as a High Court 
Justice—and many of them do. Upon being brought before the 
County Court Judge, the alleged criminal is told in simple language 
with what he is charged. He is told, ‘“‘ Now you have a right to 
be tried by a jury before the next Court of competent jurisdiction ” 
(mentioning the Court, when it is to be held, ete., so that the prisoner 
will know), “or you may be tried by me forthwith without a jury.” 
In nine cases out of ten the innocent man, and in quite a number 
of cases the guilty man, thinks he might just as well take his chances 
with a Judge as with a jury; and so he is tried by the Judge. 
A simple form of charge is drawn up, and the Judge tries him ; that is all 
there is to it. So you see, this practice of “Speedy Trials” as we call it, 
relieves the High Court of Justice of nearly all the criminal eases with 
the exception of murder and a few others. We have not had treason for 
some years in Canada and we are not likely to have another crop for 
some time. If, however, the accused elects to be tried by a jury, the 
