110
6. A signed receipt for rent of 2nd floor. 198, Hollywood Road,for 3rd and 4th moons, $16.00; occupied by Yik Koi. Dated 9th day, 5th moom, 23rd Kwangsui (1897).
7-Apparently a rough balance sheet of receipts and expenditure up to the 11th day (no month given). Total, $9,456.36. Total, $9,445,50. Loss, $10.86.
8.-On one side 36 names with numbers under them. On the other 10 names with sums of money under them. Two short memoranda of expenditure.
9. Similar in substance and arrangement to Nos. 1 and 5. Total of sums of money on it, $150.25.
--10.--Memorandum regarding some Chinese constables who have joined the force, left, or
gone abroad"
11.-List of 8 articles of jewellery.
12.-A long list of persons with sums of money against their names, and the names of the persons to whom the money was actually paid.
13. An account book. Commences on the 29th of the 11th moon (no year given) and goes down to the 28th of the 3rd moon. There is one entry for each day-the balance in favour of or against the house. On the 28th of the moon a balance of the entries for the preceding month is struck. On 28th of 3rd moon there is a cre. dit balance of $2,381.60.
14. Similar to the above. Commences on the 29th of the 3rd moon and goes down to the 17th of the 6th moon, (No year given). Final balance. Credit, $1,788.00,
15. Similar to the above. Commences on 23rd of 7th moon Peng year (1896), and goes down to the 4th of the 5th moon Teng year (1897). Final balance: debit, Tls. 4,973.254 or -$6,907.30.
16. Similar to the above. Commences on the 5th of the 5th moon Teng year (1897) and goes down to the 19th of 5th moon. No balance struck.
17.- List of articles pledged (some redeemed). Dates, but not in order. Value of articles pled- ged, $787.00. Value of articles redeemed, $121.00,
18.-List of articles pledged (some redeemed) between the 21st of the 9th moon (1896 ?) to 18th of 5th moon, 1897.
19. List of articles pledged. Commences on 17th of the 4th moon, 1895. The dates are not in order. Also contains an account of two employés with the firm.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
20. This contaifs (1) The daily accounts for the 13th, 14th, and 15th of the 11th moon, and for the 5th moon from the 5th to 19th day. These accounts give the receipts and expenditure for the day and on the back are noted down particulars of the expenditure of the gambling house. With each account is a list of the articles received as pledges. (2) An account of the share of a man holding a share of th in the business. From the 7th moon to the 4th moon (No year). (3) A pawn ticket. (4) Nine prescriptions. (5) A list of 12 names with sums of money against them : total, $62.70. Date 13th of 11th moon. (6) Four- pieces of paper, on two of which are memorandu of accounts.
In answer to further questions by the Attorney-General witness said that to him the books did not show the nature of the establish- ment, but he did not know whether the Chinese could tell. The establishment appeared to have made money last year and lost money this year, as at the time of closing they had a large debit balance. He could not tell whether the books related to Wa Lane or East Street. Witness then spoke to the entries relating to money paid to "No. 12." In regard to Sam Yeen's statements he had been able to test the accuracy of them in many cases. Tung Kum appeared to have been general agent and distributor of money. The first part of the book produced contained the names of police officers and the latter part contained the names of persons in other depart ments and also of miscellaneous persons. Tung Kum and Cheng On were not at first willing to make their statements to witness; before they did make them they were allowed to see their legal advisers. Messrs. Deacon and Hastings were
ere the advisers for Cheng On and Mr. Reece w was legal adviser for Tung Kum, Tung Kum and Cheng On were arrested on the 12th inst. and they were place in separate cells. His LordshipOn what ground were they arrested?
|
|
Witness-On banishment warrants issued under section 19 of the Gambling Ordinance.
Cross-examined by Mr. Robinson-The de- fendant had been in the Force fifteen years. He came from Bristol. His character was good. Witness was then questioned about the police rules in regard to gambling houses.
Mr. Rolinson-Have you heard that watch. men not only watch premises but shadow the Inspectors and watch them to bed ?
[August 4, 1897.
To incriminate Witchell ?—No. Through whom was the communication that they would be not punished made?—Through Mr. Ewens's interpreter.
Oh, you spoke to Mr. Ewens's clerk and told him to tell them P-Yes.
These men were banished P-Yes, With regard to Sam Yeen-he is in a differ- ent position; he is a convicted man, what hope was held out to him ?-He was told that if he would make a full disclosure his case would be taken into consideration by the Government if
desired any mitigation of his sentence. He was sentenced to nine months' imprison- ment ?-Yes.
Witness-I have heard that they watch the Inspectors. I should be more correct if I said that I have heard they watch some of the 1n-he spectors.
Cheng On said that he did not see a warrant. Is that true ?—I showed Cheng On a warrant and his legal adviser inspected it.
What he said is absolutely false, then do not think it is false.
I
Was the warrant also shown to Tung Kum ?
Yes.
Were any terms of pardon held out to Cheng On ?—I have not told him anything.
Perhaps you told his solicitor P-I do not know anything about what his solicitor told him.
Have you held out any inducement to Cheng On or to his solicitor?-No, not before he made his statement.
What was the last time you saw Cheng On for the purpose of examining him P-Yesterday, I think,
He was under a long examination yesterday? |--Not a long examination.
By the Crown Solicitor or by yourself or by whom P-By Mr. Francis.
On what date was any inducement held ont to Cheng On that it would be better for him to tura Queen's evidence ?-There was no induce- ment held out to him.
What do you understand by inducement ?- He was not promised anything and he was not threatened in any way.
Was he given to understand anything? - Not by me.
By whom P-I do not know. By Mr. Francis ?-No.
By anyone P-I do not know,
Was anyone in connection with Cheng On told that it would be better if Cheng On maile a clean breast of it P-No.
May I take it from you on oath that nothing, has taken place to give Cheng On any hope that if he turned Queen's evidence it would be better for him P-No, I will not say that. When Cheng On was arrested he was told that if be told the truth about what he knew of this matter the Government would take his case into consideration.
You do not think that amounts to anything like an inducement to turn Queen's evidence ?—
No, I do not think so.
He being under punishment at the time P-I do not think it is a direct inducement.
Mr. Robinson I did not say a direct induce ment; I said inducement.
His Lordship Of course we can judge our selves of the inducement.
Mr. Robinson-I want the judgment of the witness. I think he is very much inclined to chop logic He is sworn to tell the truth and the whole truth.
His Lordship-If there is more behind get it out of him, but if it rests here we can judge ourselves.
Mr. Robinson (to witness)--With regard to Tung Kum, when he was arrested did anything of the sort take place?
Witness Yes, the same thing. He was told that if he told the truth the Government would take his case into consideration.
Was he told who was to be the judge of the truth ?--He was not told.
Do you remember three detectives, whom Mr Reece represented, being arrested under banish ment warrants with respect to this case ?--Yes
Were they told that if they would tell the truth they would not be punished ?-Yes, they were.
And they said they knew nothing against the men who have been suspended and nothing against Witchell -No, they did not.
What did they say -If you will ask me separately in regard to each man I will tell you about them, but I cannot lamp them all to gether.
Did any of them give any information incriminate P-No.
|
was an
In answer to further questions witness said that he denied he was exceeding his powers in committing the men arrested under banishment warrants to Victoria Gaol. One of the men opium smoker. He was not told he that if
wonld make his statement first he could get his opinm. He got opium the second day after his admission to gaol.
At this point the Court adjourned."
30th July.
Before the case proceeded Mr. Robinson said- that the gentleman who was giving the bond wished to go away and counsel asked the leave of the court to extend the bond until the con- clusion of the Sessions.
The Attorney-General offered no objection, but he remarked that the application implied that his learned friend was going to occupy the court a great number of days.
Hon. F. H. May, Captain Superintendent of Police, was then called for further examination. On entering the witness box he said-My Lord, I notice in the newspaper report this morning of my evidence the following question-
His Lordship-Are we concerned with that? Witness-I wish to make a slight correction. His Lordship-Is it something you stated yourself that is not quite accurate or is the newspaper report inaccurate ?
Witness-I think there was something in the mind of the learned counsel who put the ques- tion to me that I did not take exactly as being in bis mind. The question was "Was anyone in connection with Cheng On told that it would be better if Cheng On made a clean breast of it?" I took that to mean somebody con- nected with Cheng On-some of his family re- latious or Chinese friends and I said "No." It occurs to me that possibly the learned coun- sel may have referred to Cheng On's solicitor, in which case the answer would be incorrect, for I did say to Cheng On's solicitor that the best way to help his olient would be by telling his client to make a clean breast of it. The same in regard to Tang Kum. I did not make any pro- mise or make any definite reference. I simply said to their representative, in the words of the learned counsel, that it would be better to tell
the truth.
Mr. Robinson (cross-examining)—Who is No. 12 P
Witness-No. 12 is Inspector Witchell.
I repeat the question; who is No. 12?—No. 12 is Inspector Witchell,
His Lordship-The witness has already
that the Chinese called him a stated that. You cannot go beyond that. He said, “I know the Chinese call him No. 12." jury's time is very valuable and you must really try to get the trial over in a reasonable time.
The
Mr. Robinson-I think your Lordship will see that it is Mr. May who is taking up the time. (To witness.) Who is No; 12P.
His Lordship (To witness)-In your judg. ment who is No. 12?
I
Mr. Robinson-Not in his judgment. His Lordship-As far as you know who No. 12?
Mr. Robinson-I have not asked him in con- nection with this case. I say, who is No. 12P
His Lordship-We are not dealing with any other case but this case.
Mr. Robinson-If your Lordship pleases. Who is No. 12?
Witness Inspector Witchell.
Inspector Witchell was No. 12. Who is No.
12P
His Lordship Why can't you put the ques- tion in a different way Pog
Witness Because I want to see how the. witness speaks. Your Lordship is not so au fait