472
Have you got your discharge paper ?--I did not ask for a discharge.
After twelve years' faithful service you did not get a discharge P-No; I intended to go to the country and carry on business there.
Have you a pension ?—I have. What kind of a pension have you got P-A commuted pension.
And what was the amount that you received as a commuted pension ?—I do not remember; it was $180 odd..
For twelve years' service ?—Yes.
Was that the full amount that you were entitled to ?-Yes, and three months' cum- shaw."
There was no deduction for misconduct P- No.
Did you at any time go to Sam Yeen in com- pany with Cheng On ?-No.
This concluded the cross-examination and defendant asked his Worship to order all the witnesses to be detained in Court that they could not communicate with any other witness.
His Worship acceded to the application. Ho Wai Tsim was then called. He said-I keep a mercer's shop at 118, Jervois Street. It is a shop where Chinese silk is sold. I am the manager. I know Cheng On, whom I recognise
in court.
Mr. Francis-Has that man at any time got any samples of silk from you?
Witness-Yes.
Did he get them from you personally or someone else in your employment -He got them from me personally.
moon;
When ?-During the first decade of the 4th
between the 2nd and 11th May. Did he get samples of silk on more than one occasion ?-Only once.
How many samples did he get at that time? -Three or four.
Did he change those samples or get others at any time ?-He came and asked me to change them and I said we had not any more. He did not return the samples.
How soon after he got the first samples did he come and ask for others ?-One or two days afterwards. He asked for samples of blue silk. Did he buy any silk or silk clothing from you at any time ?-He bought two pieces of silk cloth,
Was that before or after he got the samples ? -Before.
How long before ?---Between ten and twenty days.
Did he buy any silk of which you gave bim samples ?No.
Did you make any clothes for him?--Yes, two pieces of clothing.
What were they ?-One blue silk jacket and one tight silk jacket.
About what time did you make that blue silk jacket -On the 20th May.
Where did he get the silk from which you made that blue silk jacket ?-From my shop. He ordered the jacket in my shop.
Did he pay for the silk and jackets P-No, he has not paid the money.
Does he owe you for them or were they pre- sents -He owes me,
Is the account entered in the books with the proper date ?-Yes.
By what name do you know him ?-Cheng Man San.
Is that the man (pointing to Cheng On) who bought the silk and got the samples P-Yes.
Did you know him before he bought this silk P-Yes, I have known him for many years. Defendant-Do you remember if I have ever been to your shop to get samples or to buy silk?
No, I do not remember.
Mr. Francis-Your Worship, that is the case for the prosecution, and I would ask your Wor. ship to commit the case for trial. Of course
if Mr. Witchell desires to call witnesses here yeur Worship will be bound to hear them and take their evidence. This is one of those cases your Worship cannot deal with unless you entirely discharge it if you decide there is no case to go to the jury.
His Worship-There are one or two questions which I wish to ask of witnesses before com- mitting. With regard to the list of names, in what light do you wish me to regard that as evidence? It has merely been mentioned as having been found.·
HE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND.
Mr. Francis-Your Worship will please bear in mine that I did not put it in evidence. It was called for and put in evidence by the defen- dant himself; he called for it and asked for its production. Your Worship will remember that I simply brought out the fact of the existence of such a book, but I did not tender it as evi- dence nor make use of it as evidence.
Defendant-In the other case the Hon. the Captain Superintendent of Police inferred from what he had seen in other account books-
His Worship One moment.
After looking at the depositions His Wor- ship said-The book having been put in and the defendant wishing to examine further on it.-
Mr. Francis-I do not think, according to the ordinary rules with reference to the dis- covery of new evidence, he has a right to examine anything other than that which refers to him either directly or indirectly. It is a constant practice in the Supreme Court when books of a confidential character are produced, for instance, merchant's books, that only en- tries referring to the particular transactions are exposed, the witness of course swearing that there which in any way refers to the case before the is nothing else in te book or in the accounts
Court or which affects the prisoner. The de- fendant is entitled to see the entries affecting him if he likes. The defendant asked, Is there anything in that book referring to me? and the Captain Superintendent of Police was bound to say there was. The defendant is cer- tainly entitled to see anything in that book re- ferring to himself,
11
Defendant-I think the book was brought out by counsel. He said that $1.10 and $1 had been paid to "No. 12."
Mr. Francis—It was wholly in answer to your question.
Defendant-I think not, sir.
Mr. Francis-If your,Worship will look at the evidence you will see that I simply got out the fact that a complete set of accounts was found. The moment Mr.Witchell asked ques- tions about it and insisted upon knowing what entries were in it it became evidence for all par- poses.
His Worship asked if the defendant was not entitled to examine the book, it having been put in.
Mr. Francis said no.
His Worship asked for an authority.
Mr. Francis replied that he had no law on the subject with him, but it was the constant practice in the Supreme Court to disclose only such entries as related to the particular case. Coun- sel also pointed out that he did not think his Worship need trouble himself about the matter as it must be dealt with at the Supreme Court. Of course the book was in the custody of Mr. May and it had been marked by his Worship. The question of how far it was evidence would be disposed of at the Supreme Court.
His Worship (to defendant)-Do you reserve your claim to cross-examine on that book, sup- posing the case be committed?
Defendant-If your Worship commits the case I will reserve my claim.
His Worship-On that understanding I will say no more about it.
Hon. F. H. May, Captain Superintendent of Police, was then recalled.
His Worship-When did you become Captain Superintendent of Police?
Hon. F. H. May-u the 11th May, 1893. Were the police regulations, from which you quoted rule 73, made before your time? Yes,
[July 21, 1897.
Are there any orders for the guidance of the police to which you would like to call my atten. tion ?—Yes. I should like to show you the order to which Inspector Witchell referred.
Is the order you read on Saturday respect- ing gambling the only order you have issued on that subject P-I think so. I do not re- member any other order.
Has this particular order received the sanc tion of the Government?-No, it was not
necessary.
In conjunction with this order there is an other ? There is one referring to payment to informers.
61
His Worship read the order as follows—-- Gambling, public. Under instructions from the Governor no payments are to be made by the police until further orders for information given by informers in gambling cases. If the officer in charge of such district considers any informer deserving of reward he may bring such person to the notice of the Magistrate, who may make such a reward under the Ordinance."
Defendant pointed out that that order had been cancelled. There was a later order cancel-
ling the payment of rewards to informers.
asking the witness about the regulations was to His Worship intimated that his object in
see to what extent the Inspector had been neg- lecting his duty in not taking action in the matter. Witness had mentioned the order di- viding the town into sections. Was there any other order for the guidance of Inspectors? Of course there was the law itself.
Defendant-I think your Worship will find. it in the Gambling Ordinance.
Mr. Francis said he respectfully suggested that his Worship could not decide that point; the case must be committed for trial,
the Ordinance provided for two classes of In answer to further questions witness said
gaming houses. One was a public common gaming house and the other a private common gaming house. In the first the public had access and in the second access was limited to persons known to the house.
His Worship-During what time has the defendant had charge of No. 1 section ?
Witness-Since August, 1896.
Were the communications in reference to the gambling in Kwai We Lane in the form of letters ?-Yes, but unfortunately I have not got
them.
Were the communications about a particular house or houses ?--One house, No. 5, was men- tioned particularly.
Were other houses mentioned ?—Yes.
Is the charge of neglect of duty in respect of the gambling house in Kwai Wa Lane?
Mr. Francis interposed and said he framed the charge. The neglect of duty he had in his mind was in not reporting the house about which the Inspector spoke to Cheng On. There was no-charge of neglect of duty in respect of any houses in the defendant's own district.
Defendant-I would ask the Captain Super- intendent of Police, if the case is going for trial, to produce my character roll for the past fourteen years.
His Worship-I shall commit this case for trial. Will you reserve your defence?
Defendant-I do not see that you have any evidence at all that I knew there was gambling in this house. The prosecution have failed to prove that I had any knowledge there was gambling or that I was seen in the lane driving the people away or anything else. There is no case at all against me. As to the informer, no
a single word · reliance can be placed on he has said. The prosecution have not proved that I have been in the house or that I drove the people away, as a witness said I told him. The prosecution have not In those rules and regulations are there any rules referring to Inspectors regarding gam-called the man who is said to have called me bling ?-To the best of my knowledge there
in 1892,
That rule you say refers to constables and not to inspectors; is that so ?--Yes.
are not.
What rules have the Inspectors for their guidance? You read ont au order the other day; is there any other order for their guidance besides that ?There are other orders.
Those orders would be issued by the Super- intendent, would they not?-Yes.
Departmentally ?—Yes.
Have the rules and regulations been issued by the authority of the Government? Yes, but there are some orders which the Captain Superintendent has power to issue himself.
upstairs and that I was frightened to go. I think it would be an injustice and would put me to a great expense if I am committed for trial. If yon do, your Worship, I reserve my
defence.
His Worship-The case will be committed
for trial.
Mr. Francis-I think I am entitled to ask Your Worship to increase the bail, say two sureties of $500 each.
Defendant-I object to that. My family here is security enough for me without any other bail in a paltry case of this kind-a trumped up, charge brought against me by