H
June 18, 1896.]
that if this case had been a first impression he would have been inclined to suggest to his learned brother that the right course was to reserve their decision and deliver a considered written judgment; but as a matter of fact the case had virtually been before the Court on two previous occasions and the Court had expressed its opinion on the law of the case and, to some extent, on the facts of the case, and therefore he did not think it would be an advantage to adjourn their decision and give a written judgment. It appeared to him that although the case came before the Court on question of law it really resolved itself into one of evidence of whether or not the convic. tion made by the Magistrate was supported by the facts which were before him. In dealing with the question he had regard to the rules laid down in reference to presumptive evidence, and for the purpose of the present case the rules were well stated in a passage in "Archibald's Criminal Pleading and Evidence," page 274 of the last edition. A number of cases illustrat- ing the rules had reference to the recent possession of stolen property, and it was laid down that where a person was found in recent possession of stolen property and was charged with having stolen it or with being in posses- sion of it well knowing it to have been stolen, he was under the obligation to give evidence explaining away the presumption raised against him by his recent possession. If he did not explain, the presumption stood and the jury were entitled to convict upon it; and these were the principles which weighed with him in dealing with this case.
This was a case where
the presumption was sufficiently strong to war- rant the appellants being called upon to give an answer, and they might easily have given that answer and without any trouble if they had liked. They had given no answer and the case stood entirely as given in the special case. His Lordship then reviewed the various stages of the case, and asked what was the fair conclusion or presumption to be drawn from the facts ? It seemed to him that they showed that the permit and the four chests of opium were received by the two boatmen from the ap- pellants and there was a fair presumption established by the circumstances under which they were found; and the two things coming together, the opium being there, and the chests of opium corresponding with the permit being there also, and the whole thing taking place on the day mentioned in the permit-it seemed to him that no reasonable man and no jury of
.sensible men could come to the conclusion that the removal was not taking place by the sanc- tion of the appellants. He thought there was no doubt that the appellants were the owners of the opium and the question arose whether they were liable for the acts of the persons who moved the opium, and in regard to this he thought, as argued by the Attorney-General, that if these men were the agents of the appel- lants then the agents must be held as acting under the authority of the appellants, although they went further than the appellants intended. If the men had stolen the opium from Winglok Street it would have been easy for the appellants to have proved it, as the opium must have been in the previous possession of someone in Wing- lok Street. He thought the whole facts raised a presumption of guilt which was sufficient to convict upon and therefore he thought the con- viction was rightly held against the appellants, and the decision of the Magistrate would con- sequently be upheld.
The Acting Puisne Judge, in concurring, said the contention of the appellants had been that the case as stated by the Magistrate did not contain sufficient findings of fact to justify a conviction; that it was not found as a fact that the appellants were the owners of the opium or that they procured the movement of the opium. As both these facts were ingredients of the offence of which the appellants were convicted, it followed that the Magistrate came to the conclusion that such facts followed upon the collateral facts found by him, and it was not necessary in the case stated to set forth those facts, as such facts had formed the pre- mises loading up to the conclusion. He was of opinion that the conviction must stand.
The Acting Attornery-General asked their Lordships to make an order for the appeal to be dismissed with costs, such costs to include
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
June 15th.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR DR. CARRINGTON (CHIEF JUSTICE).
499
the costs of the last application to the Court burst of flame, a general helter-skelter of the on the 23rd October, when costs were reserved..occupants from the boat, much shouting and The Chief Justice made the order asked for screaming, and the firing of the alarm from the and directed the costs to be paid a fortnight sailing ship. The occupants of the boat were after taxation.
terribly excited and in their anxiety to flee from the burning deck they jumped into the water, being picked up by the other cargo boat, which immediately scooted off out of danger. The flames shot all over the boat in the twinkling of an eye and there was, in much less time than it takes to write it, a huge, fierce fire blazing, while a tremendous column of dense, black smoke ascended from the burning boat, indicat- ing to everybody looking towards the harbour
from the funnel of a steamer. a column of smoke as that never was emitted that something unusual was happening; such
It fortunately of police were at the time returning in No. 3 happened that Inspector Hanson and a party police pinnace from East Point, having been attending the funeral of Inspector Moffat, and as towering to the skies the course of the launch soon as they saw the thick smoke
was changed and they proceeded with all possible speed to the scene. Mr. Lethbridge, and a number of firemen, with that promptitude Acting Superintendent of the Fire Brigade,
KWONG CHUEN CHEUNG HING KEE FIRM 1. LO
NANG KEE FIRM AND LO KIT. TING.
defendants under a writ of foreign attachment The plaintiffs brought an action against the to recover $8,554.
had not returned.
Hon. H. E. Pollock (instructed by Mr. Reece) appeared for the plaintiffs who, he said, obtained a writ of foreign attachment against the defen- dants on the 18th May, and these. proceedings were being taken ex parte under the provisions of sub-section 17 of section 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Ordinance 13 of 1873. proprietor of the Lo Nang Kee firm and he The defendant, Lo Kit Ting, was the sole absconded from Shanghai on the 14th May and Counsel did not propose to go that day into other rival claims or disputes as to the property attached by the plaintiff, but he simply asked his Lordship to give judgment against the defendants. The petition of the plaintiffs set forth that they were merchants and commission agents carrying on business at 3, Bonham Strand West, and that the de- fendants were, until the 14th May last, carry, Lo Kit Ting was, until he absconded from ing on a mercantile business in Shanghai, and Shanghai, the manager and sole proprietor of the said firm. It was agreed between fendant firm serding goods to the plaintiff the parties that in consideration of the de- firm for sale on commission at the rate of two per cent. the plaintiff firm should pay to the defendant firm sums of money equal to or exceeding the value of the goods sent and with such payments. The accounts were settled the plaintiff firm would debit the defendant firm up to the end of last year by the appropriation by the plaintiff of various sums, but after deduct- ing these sums it was found that the defendants owed to the plaintiffs $8,554, and it was to re- cover this amount that the action was brought. firm, gave evidence in support of counsel's Tong Yat Shi, the manager of the plaintiff
opening statement.
His Lordship gave judgment against the with the usual rate of interest. The question defendants for the full amount with costs and
as to how effect could be given to the judgment was one, his Lordship said, which had better bringing into Court in the proper way and at be settled in chambers for the purpose of the proper time the parties who laid claim to the property.
which never fails them, also turned out, toge- ther with the floating fire engine, and to this efficient staff were added two or three crews from men-of-war in the harbour, who were dis- patched to render whatever assistance they could. Of course it would have been perfectly futile to try to subdue the flames on the cargo boat, and so energetic measures were taken to sare the sailing ship. The fire had quickly spread to the vessel and her starboard side was behaved with great coolness, cut the cargo boat soon ablaze. As soon as possible the crew, who away from the side and directed their efforts to extinguishing the flames on the ship. Very them were successful, but so fiercely did the fortunately they and the firemen who assisted fire rage that the wood work was charred to the thickness of one inch and the awnings and part of the rigging were also destroyed. The damage to the ship was quite bad enough, but had the fire not been subdued so speedily. it is difficult to say what would have happened There were about five thousand
cases of kerosine still on board, and it is safe to assume
that if one of them had been touched by the fire the whole ship would have been almost in- stantly in flames. While the firemen were and the launch from the Harbour Master's playing on the ship's side the police pinnace
office were engaged in dealing with the burning cargo boat. This was by no means an easy boat presented formed rather a formidable task. A floating furnace such as the cargo object to treat with and: the utmost care had to be exercised. The heat was of course very intense and it was extremely difficult to get a line fastened on to the boat, but she was in a
comparatively short time towed clear of the ship, although, owing to her helm being pulled round, she described eccentric figures, and so added to the irksomeness of the work. Eventually she was steered towards Hongham and it was indeed a unique sight to see this immense mass of flames, apparently starting from the water's TWELVE HUNDEED CASES OF KEROSINE ABLAZE. edge, and sending forth a monster tower of smoke
EXTRAORDINARY SCENE IN THE
HARBOUR, ·
THREE LIVES LOST.
16th June.
Residents in the colony yesterday morning witnessed an unprecedented spectacle in the harbour, no fewer than twelve hundred cases containing kerosine, stored on a cargo boat, being ablaze at one time. The sight was a very extraordinary one altogether and those who retain it in their memories and doubtless serve were fortunate enough to witness it will ever it up, perhaps with a little harmless exaggera The fire occurredunst before eight o'clock. tion, over the tea table when they go home. At that time the German sailing ship Columbus, which arrived here from New York on the 25th May, was discharging her cargo of kerosine. and there were two first class cargo boats, Nos, She was, of course, in the kerosine anchorage, 69 and 114, alongside, and boat No. 69 was being filled first with cases of kercsine, which were being unloaded by Messrs. Jardine, Ma theson and Co. for the Standard Oil Company. When about twelve hundred cases had been discharged into the boat there was a sudden
which ascended almost perpendicularly to the heavens, being slowly towed away from all the shipping and to a part of the harbour where she could be beached and where the spirited life of the flames could gradually die away. She about half-past ten, but it was not until this was run on to some rocks in Hongham Bay by morning that the fire had eaten its way through
the whole of the cargo.
It was rumoured that
Inspector Hanson at once made inquiries, but as a child was burnt to death in the boat and he was unable to find the papers belonging to the boat during the afternoon he could not ascertain whether there was any ground for the report. Soon after the fire broke out a couple heard squealing with all their might and as of pigs, imprisoned in a pen on the boat, were
afterwards it is a reasonable conjecture that they stopped their noise two or three minutes they perished, but, unlike the roast pigs in Lamb's dissertatio without affording anyone the opportunity of making any wonderful in- vention. It should be stated that it is probable we owe this extraordinary fire to the marvellous ingenuity of a Chinaman who thought he would
¿