July 23, 1898.1
.
Office, to again raise the rate to ten cents, at which figure it now stands, and whatever sentimental or national reasons may be urged in favour of a reduction it must be confessed that as regards this colony in particular there is no prospect of a re- duction in the postage being followed by any such large increase in the volume of correspondence as would make up for the loss of revenue by diminished rates. In a community like that of Hongkong there are very few individuals who would be deterred from writing a letter home by the fact that a stamp costs ten cents, or who | would write any more letters if the rate were reduced to five cents. Nevertheless it would be pleasant to have penny postage, especially if the home Government could be induced to bear the charges. At present, however, the colony has the rather knotty question of the amount of its contribution" to the postal subsidy still pending, and Downing Street appears to be relentless.
SUPREME COURT.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
19th July.
THE WIFE MURDER BY A CHINESE.
SENTENCE CF DEATH PASSED.
A coolie named Wan Hung was charged with having wilfully murdered his wife on the 18th of September, last year, at Praya West. After committing the deed prisoner and two other men who assisted him decamped. Pri- soner was arrested on the 14th June, but the others are still at large.
The following composed the jury-Messrs. B. K. Mehta, F. Lammert, G. C. Hayward, H. Crombie, C. W. Longett, A. W. Scheloss, and
E. Mirow.
The Attorney-General (instructed by Mr. H. L. Dennys, Crown Solicitor) appeared for the prosecution and Dr. Ho Kai for the defence. unconcerned as if the charge against him was Prisoner, who pleaded not guilty, appeared as of the most trifling character.
The Attorney-General said prisoner was & coolie, but he asked the jury to give the case the same patient care and attention they would give to it if the man on trial were a European. He had the advantage of being defended by his learned friend Dr. Ho Kai, for in case of murder where the prisoner had no counsel he was provided with one at the expense of the conrt, so that such defence as would be put before the jury would be forcibly urged by his learned friend. The deceased woman was the wife of the accused man. He thought that BEFORE SIR JOHN CARRINGTON (CHIEF be of opinion that at half-past seven o'clock on when they had heard the evidence they would
June 18th.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS.
JUSTICE.)
THROWING CAUSTIC EQDA INTO A MAN'S FACE.
Cheung Mun, one of the crew of the Empress of Japan, was charged on two counts-firstly with throwing a destructive substance with in- tent to do grievous bodily harm, and secondly with inflicting grievous bodily harm.
The jury was composed of Messrs. F. X. Ozorio, J. I. Andrew, F. Lammert, H. Crombie, A. W. Schellos, E. Moirico, and J. Noronha.
Prisoner pleaded not guilty.
The Attorney-General (instructed by the Crown Solicitor, Mr. H. L. Dennys), who appeared for the prosecution, said prisoner was charged on an information which contained two counts with having thrown some caustic soda into the eyes of a man named Lau Ching and caused him great pain and done him grievous bodily harm. The facts were exceedingly simple. The British ship Empress of Japan was on her way to Hongkong, where she arrived on the morning of the 12th of July. On the 10th of June while on her way prisoner and a man named Lau Ching, both of whom were employed on the ship prisoner in connection with the electrical apparatus and the other man as fireman. They had known each other for ten years, and for the last four years had been shipmates, sharing the same cabin. On the 10th they had some trifling disagreements, over which prisoner seemed to have brooded, for subsequently when he found Lan Ching lying on deck half asleep he poured some caustic soda into his face, some running into his eyes. Ching oried out that he was injured, and soon afterwards the doctor was called to attend him.
As soon
as the ship arrived in Hongkong the injured man was sent to the hospital, He suffered
where he had been ever since.
the evening of the 18th September last pri- soner Killed his wife by outting her throat, and that the only excuse he had to urge for such a deed was his opinion that she was a bad woman. He thought it would be shown in evidence that deceased left her husband shortly before this matter occurred, she having refused to live with him. Sometimes when husband and wife fell out and could not agree the fault lay on both sides. The poor woman was dead, and could not give her account of the matter; but whatever the merits of the squabble between husband and wife, it was perfectly clear that the mere fact of the wife refusing to live with and cutting her throat. An act like that, if her husband did not excuse his going to her
proved to be committed in this colony by a person, whatever his ideas on the subject, was in point of law simply murder. They were not there to consider what distorted views the Chinese coolie had as to his rights in regard to his wife, but to administer justice in a British colony. The deceased woman was only 21 years of age when she died. She was married about five years ago, so that she would be about 16 years of age when she married prisoner. They were people in quite humble circumstances. Up to about three months before the woman's death they were living over the Kowloon frontier. be rearing pigs. On the 12th of June of last The man's occupation seemed to
year the woman left her husband and came to live in Hongkong with a man named Ah On, but when she had been living with him a few days, her mother, who resided at 12, New Street, fetched her away, and on the 25th of June the continuing to do so until the 27th of August. woman went to live with her husband again, They had practically no means to live upon, and he believed that was the reason why on the 27th of August the woman wit out to a place as servant, the husband in the meantime sleeping at different coolie houses. On the 10th of September the woman left her place as she slept first at her mother's and subsequently servant, and during the next eight nights
at 151, Praya West, in a cubicle with another mother to make slippers. It appeared that at woman, she earning her living by helping her about 7.30 on the night of the 18th September last prisoner went to 151, Praya West, and going to the foot of the stairs called to his wife Come home quickly." The woman replied, I won't." Then a man's voice (no doubt Evidence was given by Captain Lee and prisoner's) said "If you won't come home give
a great deal of pain. Whether he lost, the sight of both eyes or not remained to be seen. Prisoner in the course of a statement he made said, "I did not know the stuff I poured on complainant would injure his eyes. I bad no desire to hurt complainant. Before I poured the stuff on to his face I saw him raise himself up to strike. I have poured the stuff on to my hands without injuring me. I did not know it would injure his eyes. I got it from the engine room. It was caustic soda."
others.
Prisoner made practically no defence. He was sentenced to four years on the first connt and one year on the second the sentences to run concurrently.
*
**
me back the tooth brush," no doubt asking her for this to get her to come downstairs. The woman got him what he wanted, and when about five steps from the foot of the stairs she throw the tooth brush to prisoner, who had ascended three of the stairs, Prisoner then
caught hold of the woman by the hair and pulled her downstairs. Then the two other men appeared. One of them pinioned the woman, another hold back her head, and the husband. who had a knife in his hand, cut her throat, inflicting such injuries that she died shortly afterwards. The men then made off, but on the 14th of June prisoner was arrested in Upper Lascar Street, brought before the Magistrate, and committed for trial. The other two men were still at large.
The evidence. given at the Magistracy was then repeated.
criticised at some length the evidence for the Dr. Ho Kai, in his speech for the defence, prosecution, pointing out the contradictions
which it contained.
His Lordship alluded to the contradictions in his summing up, but reminded the jury that prisoner himself had said "I had a right to take her life." Though the woman might have been living wrong her life was as precious to her as that of anyone else, and the law was bound to protect that life.
The jury retired at twenty past six to consider their verdict, returning in about ten minutes.
The Clerk of the Court (Mr. Soth)-Gentle- men, have you agreed upon your verdict? What say you? Do you find the prisoner guilty or not guilty?
The Foreman (Mr. Mehta)-Guilty. The Clerk-Are you unanimous ? The Foreman—Unanimous,
The Clerk (to prisoner)-Wan Hung, you have been found guilty by a unanimous jury of the crime of murder. Have you anything to say why the sentence of death should not be passed on you?
This was translated to prisoner.
Prisoner-I leave it entirely in your lord- ship's hands.
His Lordship having put on the black cap then said, his remarks being translated sentence by sentence-Wan Hung, you have been found guilty of the crime of wilful murder on evidence which I think left no doubt of your guilt. There might have been doubt on the evidence of the prosecution alone, but there was your own admission that you killed this unfortunate woman because she was unfaithful to you and on that I think the jury (very rightly had no and that you are guilty of murder. I do not know doubt that your hand had done her to death whether there is any idea among people of your class that a husband who finds his wife unfaith- ful to him can take her life in that way. If there is any such idea I beseech people of that kind to remember that the law of Hongkong allows of no such action, and that the person who takes such action must be responsible to the law. It now remains only for me to pass on you the sentence of the law, and that is that you be taken hence to the place from whence you came and that you be there hanged by the neck until you be dead and that your body be buried in such place as His Excellency the Governor shall or. soul. der. And may the Lord have mercy on your
Prisoner, who maintained his composure, was then removed.
His Lordship then called before him one of the witnesses--an old woman-who had made a state- ment contradictory to one she made before the she said positively that prisoner was at the bottom of magistrate. When before the magistrate the stairs when the deceased woman went down on the night of the murder. Now she said she did not notice the man and could not say whether it was prisoner or not. Two contra- dictory statements like these amount to perjury, and she was sentenced to three months' hard labour.
20th July.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION,
BEFORE MR. JUSTICE WISE (PUISNE JUDGE.)
CLAIM BY A LIVERY STABLE PROPRIETOR. J. Kennedy, livery stable proprietor, sought to recover from a Spaniard named Filepe Romano $100 for damages done to a pony and⠀⠀ trap hired by him.
Mr. Gedge appeared for plaintiff and Mr. Slade, barrister, for defendant.