That is to say if a prisoner failed to give eridonoe oi his osn bshall, as heia privileged to dc under the Criminal Law Amendment Act— similar to the New Zealand's Crim inal Evidence Act— is a judge entitled to comment on the fact to the prisoner* disadvantage P In the Chief Justice's opinion the judge could so comment, and an infetonoe oould properly be drawn by the jury from a prisoner's silence ; he therefore thought tbe oon. viotion in this c»se should be supported. I Mr Justioe Windeyer was in accord I with the Chief Justioe, and pointed out r that from time immemorial judges had , been in the habit of drawing an j inference from a prisoner's eilence, and '. it was a natural thing to do. He saw i no reason why the same inference ; should not be drawn in a criminal as t ia a civil case. Ho believed that inno ! cent men would eagerly avail themselves ) of the law which enabled them to give 1 evidence. He had known oases where • men hud oeoured their acquittal by tho , exercise of this privilege. A jury could not be prevented from forming their own conclusions from a prisoner's tilence. Mr Justioe Innos consideied that a judge had no right to camment on a prisoner's silence, and therefore I held that tho oonviction could not stand. The clause in tho Criminal law Amend -1 ment Act enabling a prisoner to give ! evidence on his own bebalf set out that ' a prisoner should be a competent, but ! not compellable, witness. If by diroot [ or moral compulsion a pressure was pnt upon a prisoner to give evidenoe, it was contrary to this provision. If an inference were drawn froui a prisoner's silence it would indireotly have the elect of making a prisoner a oompell able witness. Mr Justioe Stephen con curred in Mr Justice Innes's view. Mr Justice Owen sided with the Cl-ief Justice and Mr Justice Windeyer as to the reasonableness of drawing a certain inference from a prisoner's silence. Me Justioa Poster was of o pinion that the prisoner was not rendered a oomjiellab'e witness by being allowed tbe dieoretion of givin* evidence ou hia own behalf, and having an iuference drawn against him if he did nut. It was reasonable to draw such an iutoronc". 