APPENDIX. 183 
fidence or irrelevancy, as an excuse for not answering the 
question, and he must pay the costs. From this judgment 
it will be perceived that even the refusing to answer an 
irrelevant question may lead to the infliction of a heavy 
penalty on a medical practitioner. A man who refuses to 
answer a question which the Court considers to be relevant 
and proper, may render himself liable to imprisonment for 
contempt of Court. 
Examination-in-Chief. 
The ordinary course of proceeding is as follows :—After 
opening the case, the counsel for the prosecution calls the 
witnesses, and examines them according to the rules of » 
evidence—that is, he brings out, by questions which do not 
suggest their answers, the facts relevant to the issue to be 
tried which are within his personal knowledge. Those 
questions which do suggest the answers, are called “leading” 
questions. With one exception it is not the practice to 
allow these to be put in this part of the examination. The 
exception, according to .Mr..Stephen, is: “When the judge 
is satisfied, either by a witness's demeanour or by contra- 
dictions between the evidence and the depositions, that he 
is trying to keep back the truth and favour the prisoner, 
he may, in his discretion, allow the counsel for the Crown 
to ask leading questions and, as the phrase is, to treat the 
witness as hostile.” When the examination-in-chief is closed, 
the next step is the cross-examination. 
Cross-examination, 
In this, the second stage, the counsel for the defence 
extracts from the veterinary witness, by questions which 
may suggest the answers in the strongest form, any facts 
that may appear to be favourable to his client, and which 
he believes to be within the witness’s knowledge. Leading 
