378
THE HONGKONG. WEEKLY PRESS AND
HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR-I think thinks it be," being inserted after the words that is not necessary. No doubt every member “and” and before the word "provided" in the has read it because a copy of it appeared in the third line, The clause deals with the mainten. public press. I have no doubt we all read it; Iance and lighting of private back streets. did I know.
The COLONIAL TREASURER-Has the hon. member considered the expense?
The Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD said he cer tainly thought that the Government, now they were begining to deal with this question, of surface crowding, should do as had been done elsewhere and limit the height of buildings. The question of compensation was one which sould be grappled with and would be an economy in the end. It was all important that Hong- kong should be maintained a olean port.
The DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKƐ asked the Acting Attorney-General if there was any thing in the Bill to prevent the owner of a private street or lane building over it in order to evade this clause entirely. He found that there was nothing in the Ordinance to prevent him from doing it. A bye-law had been passed by the Sanitary Board with the view of meeting such cases, under section 13 of Ordinance 15 of 1894, but was held to be ultra vires. It seemed to him, therefore, that it should really be provided for in the Ordinance. There were many private lanes in the city, and a man wishing to avoid all this trouble might cover over his lane.
His EXCELLENCY the GOVERNOR said that if they were satisfied that it was necessary that the street should be widened and that plague was the result of the narrowness of the streets they would have to go a step further and face a mnol: larger question of expense. If they could prevent a recurrence of plague it would be worth any expense to the colony, but if they spent some ten million dollars without effect they would find themselves in rather a difficult position. The aggregate value of property in Victoria was about $40,000,000 and if the pro- visions of this Bill were to apply, it was stated-He has got what he pleases to call back that about three-fifths of the property would be affected.
The DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS said that the clause as it now stood did not touch any property owned in Hongkong, but it would effect the sale of land in Taipingshan. They had sold all the land in the city almost ex- cept a few acres, The ground on the Praya Reclamation was already in private hands, and as they reclaimed land it went over to private hands, so that although the Govern- ment would be paid a lower price for land not yet sold if the law was altered as was proposed the change would be extremely slow, When a house was pulled down or reconstructed—which did not happen very often-the street on which it faced would not be widened, but would remain a 10 or 15 feet street, and the owner instead of rebuilding his house three storeys high would only be able to build a smaller house, and it seemed to him he would have a claim for compensation against the Government. The man bought the land years ago at a certain price, having calculated what return he would get, and if they altered this clause as proposed by the honourable member opposite he would find his land of very much less value. He quite agreed that if they had to improve the town it would be on the line of resuming property as they had done in Taipingshan, but he thought the time had not come yet for tonching that question.
His EXCELLENCY the GOVERNOR (to the the Hon. T. H. Whitehead)--What do you say to that?
The Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD-I do not prese the suggestion.
The clause was passed as it stood
With regard to clause 7 the ACTING AT TORNEY-GENERAL proposed an amendment to sub-section a providing for a window overlook. ing the open space in the rear of a building, re- marking that it was no use having such open space unless they provided some window to open out into that open space.
The Hon. Dr. Ho KAI suggested that they should be allowed time to consider the amend ment.
His EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR-Are there any other suggestions?
The Hon. T. H. WHITEHEAD-I propose to add to sub-section b the words "If the entire depth from frontage to frontage exceeds 50 feet."
His EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR-These two amendments require a little consideration Bo we will let this olause stand over. The amendments can be handed in to the clerk and then members will have the opportunity of thinking them out and making suggestions at the next meeting of the Council.
The Hon. Dr. Ho KAI-At the moment it would be impossible to say whether they would be possible or not.
The ACTING ATTORNEY-GENERAL mentioned one or two other amendments which he pro- posed bringing forward in the clause.
Clause 8 was also held over.
A small alteration was made in Clause 9, the words, May if the Director of Public Work
|
The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE said such a case had actually occurred. There was a block of property in Wanohai with a lane down the back, and this lane was now completely covered. The Sanitary Board tried to stop it under a bye-law but they did not succeed.
His EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR-Were there no windows opening on the lane ?
The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
yards, and this complies with the Ordinance.
The DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS-What I suggest is that it be provided that all existing lights be left as they are,
The COLONIAL TREASURER-The question of compensation would come in.
His EXCELLENCỶ THE GOVERNOR-Cer- tainly.
The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE -If this Bill is passed I do not think a similar case would be likely to occur again as an owner in re-building a block of houses would be tempted to economise space by putting in a lane instead of backyards,
The remaining clauses 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 were passed as they stood without comment. His EXCELLENCY the GOVERNOR-Clauses 7 and 8 will stand over till our next meeting, and I shall be glad if honourable members who have the amendments-the Hon. Attorney General and the Hon. T. H. Whitehead--will let the olerk have them so that members may consider them fully.
The Council then resumed.
THE RATING BILL.
The Bill entitled an Ordinance to amend the Rating Ordinance, 1888, was read a third time and passed.
The Council adjourned until Monday week.
SUREME COURT,
28th October.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR W. MEIGH GOODMAN (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE).
THE HUNGĦOM MURDER CASE, —THE
ACCUSED DISCHARGED.
Pang Pan, carpenter, Market Street, Hung- hom, and Li Ki, oook, Bulkeley Street, Hang- hom, were charged with the wilful murder of Pun Fuk, sawyer, at Hunghom, on the 22nd August. They pleaded not guilty.
The jurors were Messrs. W. Ï'. Marlow, H. Haynes, T. P. Coohrane, H. E. Mackensie, E. II. Ray, M. von Obrowsky, and G. A. Friesland. The Hon. H. E. Pollock (Acting Attorney. General), instructed by Mr. Bowley (Asting Crown Solicitor), appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Slade (instructed by Messrs. Deacon and Hastings) for the defence.
The hearing commenced on Monday last. The evidence and the addresses of Counsel were concluded by Friday evening.
On Saturday morning His Lordship summed up, concluding at about fine minutes to one
|
|
[November, 1809.
It
Street, and asked him for so
(some:
e money does not appear for what the money was asked The first prisoner replied "I have no money to give you; Let us fight and then I will give it you.' The deceased man thereupon pushed the first prisoner, not violently, with his hand, and asked why he refused to pay. The first prisoner replied by striking the deceased with his fiat, whereupon the deceased ran away. The first prisoner then chased after him, and when near Temple Street stabbed the deceased with a chis ol, inflicting a terrible wound on his thigh, from which wound the deceased died, fifteen days afterwards, in the Civil Hospital, to which he was carried in an ambulance the day he was wounded.
As regards the second prisoner (Li Ki) the oase against him is that he struck the deceased with a hammer on the right side of his back, almost at the same time as or immediately before, t
the blow inflicted by the chisel. It is clear from the medical evidence that the blow with the hammer in no way contributed to the death of the deceased. It is not alleged that the second prisoner was present at the conversation as
as to the money, nor has any special reason been suggested why he should have joined in the attack on the deceased. I am not at present discussing the question how far the charge against each of the prisoners, respectively, is proved. At this point I will tell you what the law is, so far as it is applicable to this charge.
Murder is unlawful homicide - with 'malice aforethought, Manslaughter is unlawful homicide without malice aforethought, Now as regards provocation, it is laid down correctly in Archbold's Criminal Pleading as follows "No provocation whatever can render homicide: justifiable or even exousable; the least it can amount to is manslaughter. If a man kill another suddenly without any, or indead with. out a considerable provocation, the law implies malice and the homicide is murder, but if the provocation were great and such as must have greatly excited him, the killing is manslaughter only."
If. for instance, a man had a chisel in his hand and while working at his bench receives a violent blow and turns round and stabs his as sailant with the chisel in the heat of temper caused by the blow and the assailant unfortuna tely dies from that blow, this might not impro perly be held to amount only to manslaughter; but if a man, receiving a slight push, retaliates by striking his assailant violently with his fist- and the assailant runs away, then undoubtedly, if the man pursued his retreating assailant and stabbed him to death with a chisel while the assailant was unarmed and not threatening further violence, such an act would be murder, The revenge is not proportionate to the provÓ- cation, and the law would imply malice.
Now, as regards the alleged act of the second prisoner, as the blow, alleged to have been in...: dicted by him with the hammer, in no way contributed to the death, the second prisoner would be entitled upon this indictment to be acquitted unless you are satisfied by the evidence that he was acting in concert with the first prisoner. If the attack was made by the two, together, with the intention of killing the de- ceased or of inflicting grievous bodily harm, and the first prisoner was found guilty of murder,~~ then the man who struck with the hammer would be guilty of murder also; because, if two persons attack a man in concert and, armed with deadly weapons, both strike him and one of them kills him, the other is responsible for the acts of the actual murderer.
Such I take to be the law applicable to this qase. It is simple and in accordance with com- mon sense. But is to arrive at a
conclusion as to the facts of the case. You are the judges of those facts, and it is my duty to tell you with regard to each of the prisoners, taking their cases separately, that unless you are satisfied of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt, it will be your duty to acquit them. I may also remind you that by the law of this colony
coal difficulty in this o
In the course of his address His Lordship | son is arraigned for any offenderə
said-The accused persons, Pong Pan and Li Ki, are charged with the wilful murder of one Pan Fuk, at Honghom in this colony, on 22nd August last. The case for the pro- scution briefly amounts to this, viz., that the deceased man, walking with friend, met the 1st prisoner (Pong Pun) in Bulekley
!
|
any per visited by the law with capital punishment, then and in such case the jury must be unanimous in their verdict of guilty or not guilty, but if a majority con- sisting of not less than five jurors should find such person guilty of a less crime than ospital one, then the finding of such majority shall be the verdict and sentence shall follow