of this kind is always the best, the sim murder, counsel were allowed to the ap pellee, on the theory that the proceedings plicity and innocence, the artless and in were conducted with individual spleen. (2 genuous behavior of one whose conscience Hawkins, c. 39, sec. 3; 1 Chitty Crim. Law, acquits him, having something in it more moving and convincing than the highest 410; 17 State Trials, 430.) So, too, the prohibition of counsel applied eloquence of persons speaking in a cause only to matters of fact, as the court assigned not their own." (2 Hawkins, c. 39, sec. counsel to argue a doubtful point of law 2.) Shades! of Dunning, of Erskine and arising at the trial, but it was held that the of Scarlett, how destructive of your noblest prisoner must propose the point, and if the triumphs would these boasted oracles of the court thought it would bear debate, counsel law have proved, had not milder views pre would be assigned. (7 State Trials, 1523.) vailed in happier ages than those of Bacon At the trial of Lord Preston in 1691, Chief and Hale. We now turn to the cases which illustrate Baron Atkyns said : " It is not the doubt of the prisoner but the doubt of the court the statements above made. that will occasion the assignment of counsel." Upon the trial of Thomas Howard, Duke (12 State Trials, 659.) of Norfolk, for high treason, in the four A third exception arose where the issue teenth year of the reign of Elizabeth, he turned on collateral facts, such as a plea of besought the Lord Chief Justice, presid sanctuary, or a pardon, or upon an assign ing over the House of Peers, to assign ment of error to reverse a sentence of out him counsel for the purpose of answering lawry. Upon these matters the prisoner the indictment, and was told in reply that: was entitled to counsel. (Foster's Crown ' in case of high treason he cannot have Law, pp. 42, 46, 56, 232; Ratcliffe's Case, counsel allowed, and that he was to answer 4 State Tr. 47.) to his own fact only, which himself best It is quite clear that these exceptions knew and might without counsel sufficiently were of but little practical benefit to those answer." Norfolk urged : " I was told be fore I came here, that I was indicted upon who were ignorant of law. The apologists for the rule that prisoners the' statute 25 Edward III. I have had tried for felony should not have counsel very short warning to provide to answer were men of high legal station and renown. so great a matter; I have not had four Lord Coke declared that the reason of its teen hours in all, both day and night, and adoption was because the evidence by which now I neither hear the same statute alleged, the prisoner was to be condemned ought to and yet I am put at once to the whole herd be so very evident and so plain that all the of laws, not knowing which particularity to counsel in the world should not be able to answer unto. The indictment containeth answer it. (3 Inst. 137.) Sir John Davys sundry points and matters to touch me by (preface to Davys' Reports) wrote : "Our circumstance, and so to draw me into mat ters of treason which are not treasons them law doth abhor the defence and mainten ance of bad causes more fhan any other selves: therefore with reverence and humble law in the world," while Sergeant Hawkins submission, I am led to think I may have contended that the rule was reasonable, "as counsel ... I am hardly handled; I have every one of common understanding may had short warning and no books; neither as properly speak to a matter of fact as if book of statutes nor so much as the he were the best lawyer," and that " it Breviate of Statutes. I am brought to requires no manner of skill to make a fight without a weapon." To which Sir James Dyer, Lord Chief plain and honest defence, which in cases
