A Legal View of the Schley Inquiry. asked for an inquiry because of criticisms or libels about which, now that he had asked, the government wished to be specifically in formed. These materials were put into shape for clear examination under the prac tice of such courts, by pointing out in the
sides of what is called, for want of a better 127 name, an "Inquiry. Here is the usual simplest instance of a witness on his guard. On cross-examination of a witness called by the government, Mr. Rayner asked,— "Have you discussed this (referring to a
CAPTAIN JAMES PARKER. precept what the government considered it especially worth while to have reported upon by the court. It is idle to imagine that such a case can be tried without bias, and no better illustration of the substantial fairness of our trials in common law courts can be found than in the . exhibition of what the late Mr. Justice Ste phen called the "subtle partisanship" of the "experts" in this trial. It was not the coun sel merely who were evidently on opposite
certain matter in evidence) with anybody since this court of inquiry?" The witness answered, "I think I have, in fact, I know I have." "With whom?" The witness said to the Judge Advocate, "Do you want that question answered?" Judge Advocate, "Yes, of course. Answer, "With the Judge Advocate Gen eral of the court." "Any one else?"
