November 28, 1898.7
LORD CHARLES BERESFORD AT SHANGHAT.
[SPECIAL TELEGRAM TO THE “DAILY PRESS."]
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
ment be threatened her with a bamboo pole which apparently was handy in the room, and then she bit his thumb. (Prisoner's thumb was bound up.) There was only evidence of one ENTERTAINED AT DINNER BY THE blow on her person, and that blow unfortunately
CHINA ASSOCIATION:
fell in a place where she was so to speak diseased. That blow caused her death under the circum- stances mentioned by the Attorney-General, The Attorney-General had very properly said the Court might be lenient with him, and he agreed with him, and would therefore sentence prisoner only to a short term of imprisonment. Still people like him must learn they must not take bamboo poles and strike women or anybody else with them. Through giving way to temper he had the
SHANGHAI, 20th November, Last night Lord Charles Beresford attended the annual dinner of the China Association at which 160 persons were present. Lord Charles, who spoke for an hour. delivered an ad- mirable, address, in the course of which he complained of the entire loss of prestige at Peking sustained by the British Govern- ment. He contended that England had no policy in China and that the Russians were completely surprised at being allowed to make such a large advance. The British sphere of influence in the Yangtsze valley was altogether illusory. The only solution of the China pro. blem was for Britain, America, Germany, and Japan to come to an agreement with regard to the "open door." Britain must re-organise the Chinese ariny. A strong resolution was un- animously passed embodying Lord Charles' points.
SUTREME COURT.
death of this woman on his mind. The sent- ence of the Court upon him was that he be im. prisoned for six months with hard labour.
ANOTHER MANSLAUGHTER CASE,
Chung Lok and Cheung Mui were indicted for the manslaughter of another man named Li Sang..
First prisoner said he struck deceased, but not with the intention of killing him. It was done by accident. He struck deceased just one blow.
Second prisoner also pleaded guilty. He called his lordship's attention to the fact that the man had been sick for some time, and that bis action was quite justifiable in returning the blow, but he had no intention of killing him.
His Lordship said the evidence in the deposi- tions did not support the contention that second prisoner was acting in self-defence.
Second prisoner said that if there was no BEFORE SIR JOHN CARRINGTON (CHIEF evidence of this in the depositions he must
18th November.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS,
JUSTICE).
THE CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER AGAINST A HUSBAND.
Lui Ng was indicted for the manslaughter of his wife, Wong Mui, on the second of Novem- ber. On the charge being interpreted to him,
seized hold of a piece something and struck my brother. stick away from him and he gave me, my foot. I then gave away, I struck him on the right arm.
him one blow
perfect stranger in the colony and I have no money to e lordship not to punish me severely but to pass,
engage a solicitor, but I ask
slight sentence upon me.—
Second prisoner said First prisoner arrived in Hongkong on the 19th September last was here on the 10th September. He came down here to look for me. On the 20th Sept. some one told me my brother was on board a steamer, I went down and found him. I asked him to come ashore with me and he did so. The next day I met deceased on the wharf. He asked me to pay him some money for food supplied to my brother. I asked my brother how much I should pay him. My brother said ten cents and also the price of one meal. "I offered deceased 20 cents, but he refused to ac cept it and we had a quarrel. He struck me on the leg with some sharp instrument, so I tried to defend myself and struck him. If I had not done so he might have killed me. As I am a perfect stranger here and know nothing about the law of this colony I thought the offloors would not interfere with me for fighting like that. I ask your lordship to deal with me len- iently.
Mr. Pollock said it appeared from the medi cal evidence given at the Police Court that deceased was suffering from an enlarged and softened spleen. He thought there could be no doubt that on this
there general melee or
So
DE 800 Are going on : ask for permission to engage a solicitor to which more than two people were enga
case as in the last they at for
defend him.
His Lordship said the law was that if two people fought and one killed the other in the fight he was liable for manslaughter.
Second prisoner-I admit 1 struck him one blow and only one blow.
His Lordship-There is no doubt that the man died from the effects of the blows given to
Prisoner pleaded guilty but asked his lordship to have mercy upon him. He did not inten-him on this occasion. tionally kill his wife; it was purely accidental.
His Lordship-Of course if he had inten led to kill her that would have been another offence and he would have been tried for murder.
Prisoner admitted he caused his wife's death by striking her with a bamboo. He was very sorry for what he had done.
The Aoting Attorney-General (Mr. Pollock) said he expected his lordship had read the de- positions in the case. It was a case of a very unusual and somewhat distressing character. As his lordship was aware, from the depositions taken at the Police Court, the deceased woman was prisoner's wife and was at the time prisoner inflicted this blow upon her pregnant, and it was a very unusual kind of pregnancy-that is an extra uterine pregnancy-and the medical evidence given at the Police Court by Dr. Bell was to the effect that in such a case the result was almost invariably fatal in the ordinary course of things, apart from any violence. That being so, in preparing the indictment in this case he framed it as one of manslaughter and not of murder, because it did not seem to him that one would be justified in assuming the blow was given with the intention of inflicting death upon this unfortunate woman. There was no doubt, upon the man's own confession and upon his statement, that he did inflict a blow upon de- ceased, but in view of the fact that prisoner did not intend to cause death, and also in view of the fact that there undoubtedly was a quarrel going on for some minutes before the blow was struck between prisoner and deceased, he would submit to the court that this was a case of a very peculiar character in which death could not possibly have been foreseen as the result of the
blow, and therefore he would ask his lordship to
take a merciful view of the case.
His Lordship, addressing prisoner, said he was glad he had pleaded guilty to this charge. It showed he was sorry for t he done. It seemed to him that it was quite clear prisoner did not mean to cause the woman's death. Le was afraid she seemed to be a bad-tempered wo- man, and according to the evidence of one of the witnesses, a lazy woman.
Second prisoner-I admit I gave him one blow and there were several other blows inflicted by several other persons.
whether he pleads guilty or not.
His Lordship-He must make up his mind Second prisoner I am not willing to proceed with the case unless your lordship provides me with a solicitor or barrister.
His Lordship-Tell him I cannot supply him with a barrister or solicitor.
Second prisoner-I am a perfect stranger here and I am poor and I have no friends and cannot engage anyone.
plead guilty or not?
His Lordship (to the interpreter)-Does he
that in consequence of one blow he died.
Second prisoner-I admit I struck him and
His Lordship-Ask him if he pleads guilty or not guilty.
Second prisoner-I plead guilty.
by pleading guilty they admit they had a part His Lordship-They both understand that
in causing the death of that man unlawfully.
On this being translated to them, the inter- preter said they both replied they did it uninten- tionally. They tried to defend themselves. First prisoner said, "I struck him once," and the second said, "I struck him once, and in consequence of that he died."
His Lordship-Tell the first prisoner I will hear what he has to say in four of the miti- gation of the sentence.
First prisoner said-I arrived here on the 19th of September last, and on the morning of the 20th September deceased asked me to go to Peruk. I refused to go with him and he struck
me.
me to peceased was going himself and he asked
2
o well, found out he was going to sell me at Perak as a pig or a slave and I refused to go and he gave me a blow. He forced me to go with him into a small boat and I on board steamer. I
some time and then my elder brother, the other prisoner-came on board and found me there. He asked me to go on shore with him. While he was speaking to me, deceased came up and expenses. Then my brother offered him 20 cents. not got his meal ready for him, and He refused to accept it, demanding more, and then they got into quarrel which lasted | then we had à quarrel. We came to blows. for some time. According his state Deceased made a great noise and then he
far as the prosecution were
in this
one single moment that either of these men intended to cause the death of deceased, or that they used such a weapon as would be likely to cause the death of deceased. Perhaps in this case his lordship might be able to deal mercifully with the prisoners.
In answer to his lordship, second prisoner said there were five or six men attacking de ceased.
His Lordship said he thought it was clear prisoners did not intend to cause the death of this man. They only intended to beat him. Some time before there had apparently been a quarrel in the street between them; but it was quite clear that prisoners and two or three other men set upon deceased and beat him. One of the prisoners struck him with an umbrella, and the other kicked him in the belly. He had no doubt it was that kick in the belly which caused his death. Deceased was suffering, it seemed, from an enlarged and softened spleen. His spleen was broken by the blow and death was caused in that way. The law said that although people might be diseased in that way other people wereto keep their hands off them and not cause their death by violence. People "of prisoners' class must learn that when they had a quarrel
ious than the last, and therefore prisoners must they must not set upon a man and beat him in this way.
He thought this case was more ser- have a longer sentence, although he would not give them a very severe sentence He could make no difference between them. He thought both were guilty. Therefore the sentence on each of them would be imprisonment for two
years.
ROBBERY WITH ARMS AT KOWLOON,
Wong Kam Lin was indicted for robbery with arms at British Kowloon on the 17th August.
H. Ruttonjes (foreman), J. F. Waddell, W. The following composed the jury — Messrs. Parlane, J. A. Guttierez, C. T. Lee, A. 0.
Gutierrez, and G. M. Carvalho.
The Acting Attorney-General said prisoner in this case was charged with robbery on the 17th August of this year near Tung Kwa Wan in this colony. He was charged with robbery on two different counts. In the first
he
was charged with having committed robbery, ho being at the timearmed with an offensive weap that was to say a revolver, and in the sec count he was charged with robbing compl The circumstances in this case were exce simple. Complainant, Yan Chui Ku, who lived on the first floor of 8. Second On the 17th of August, at 11:45 a.m.
occasion prisoner complained -- that is asked my brother to pay for my food and other in company with two or three other p
she had
|
二
1