COURT Do you object on the ground that he is incapable or incompetent to take an oath ? MR TAYLOR: I object on the ground I have already taken. Yea, he is certainly incompetent to take an oath. He has been asked a question by Wing, and he has not yet given an answer to it. COURT: Then under the "Canada Evidence Act"he is entitled to affirm. the Canada Evidence Act says that if any objection is taken to a witness as being incompetent to take an oath the said person may make an affirmation. If you say you do object to him being incompetent then he may be allowed to make an affirmation. MR TAYLOR: If your Honor so rules that this method be adopted, I object to that too. MR MORESBY: (To Court) What section is that? COURT: Section 23 of the Canada Evidence Act. MR TAYLOR: I understand then if your Honor rules that way he can affirm. COURT: I simply rule this; he is entitle to affirm as he is objected to as being incompetent. MR TAYLOR: My objection was that he does not understand the nature or quality of any of those oaths, and when a witness makes a statement that all those forms are the same, that in itself shows that the witness is not competent. COURT: That is simply driving home your objection, that he is incompetent to take an oath. MR POWELL: Then your Honor rules now that he is entitled to affirm. MR TAYLOR: Let us understand this. My objection that I have already taken is this, when this witness said all those forms were alike to him , I said then he was a person whose testimony should not be received BC Archives GR-0419 BRITISH COLUMBIA. ATTORNEY GENERAL. Box 100 File 1904/10 Attorney General documents.