April 27, 1901.1
REVIEW.
The Newspaper Press Directory for 1901; 56th Annual Issue; London, C. Mitchell & Co. THIS is a case of an old publication being kept on the foremost files of time. Besides being a newspaper directory for the whole world it forms a gazetteer of the British Empire, giving especial attention to trade statistics. The Colonial Supplement contains an able article by Mr. Ernest E Williams on the chances of an Imperial Customs Union. He brings for- ward many arguments to prove that there is a pressing need for this, and concludes :-
"It is therefore particularly foolish to talk, as opponents of the Customs Union do talk, of imperilling our big foreign trade by cultivating our small Colonial trade. As foreign industrial development increases our trade in foreign countries must inevitably wane, at the same time that the Colonial market is growing, and at the same time as our trade in that market will also be growing, if we secure it by, the establishment of a Customs Union." Thero are also articles on The Impending Australian Tariff, Import Trade of Australasia, Import Trade of South Africa, The New Colonies, The Rhodesian Outlook, Import Trade of the West Indies, Import Trade, of India, Canada, with Trade Statistics, &c., &c.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
that again he was for over fifteen years in the Imperial service at home as discipline warder.
Mr. Pollock: So you have had about 20 years gaol service altogether.
Mr. Craig answered in the affirmative and continuing his evidence said that on the day in question he was inspecting the lower yard in the gaol accompanied by the chief warder, Mr. Pierpoint The three prisoners were picking cakum.
His Lordship asked how many men there were in the yard at the time.
851
Witness Yes, on the order of the Captain Superintendent of Police,
Prisoner In addition to this flogging, did you not put me on crank work for four weeks?
Nothi
His Lordship Tell him Mr Craig is not at the head of affairs.
Prisoner-Yes, my lord, but this was done. Witness-They were reported by three of the warders for wilfully creating a disturbance, and using insulting language towards an officer. They were brought before Captain May and sentenced to receive twelve strokes.
Mr. Pollock-Was that officer you, Mr. Craig?
P
Witness-No; it was another officer.
His Lordship-That has nothing at all to do with this case. I am not going to have him Tell him that what we want is any injustice take up the time of the Court with nonsense. done before the stabbing.
The prisoner-F have a witness here to prove that this witness ill-treated me aftor the assault.
Mr. Craig replied between 20 and 30, all of whom were engaged in picking oakum. The first prisoner was in the gaol for piracy, and had to undergo ten years imprisonment, hard labour. He was convicted on July 18th, 1900. The second prisoner was in for stealing from a 18th, 1899, to 14 years. The third prisoner was dwelling house, and was sentenced on January in for three years for forgery. He (witness) was going from the lower yard into the work- shop when he was struck from behind on the back of the head, and while defending himself from the two prisoners he saw the third prisoner His Lordship-I have nothing to do with coming in from the south side of the shop. He that at all. That is a matter of prison discip received a stab on the shoulder, and one on the line. He must complain to the Captain head from the first and second defendants. He Superintendent of Police. was not struck by the third defendant because Prisoner-Is it not tae, usual thing in gaol of the timely arrival of some warders. He that each prisoner is allowed 32 yards of cloth was making for him (Mr. Craig) but was to make a jacket P-No, my lord. stopped by one of the assistant warders. Is it not prison regulations that each prisoner Here the witness produced his uniform coat is entitled to sixteen ounces of raw rice per showing the cuts in it which had been diem?-Twenty-four with hard labour, divided made by the thrasts with the knives. He was into three meals. sure the second prisoner struck him. He was BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR JOHN CARRING-attended by Dr. Thompson but had not yet
TON, C M.G. (CHIEF JUSTICE).
SUPREME COURT.
Friday, 19th April.
IN CRIMINAL SESSIONS.
THE OUTBREAK IN THE GAOL.
"
Mak Su, Ip Nam and Yang Tuk were indict ed for attempted murder in the Victoria Gaol last month.
Mr. H. E. Pollock, K.C., the Acting Attorney General, prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and Capt. the Hon. F. H. May watched the proceed. ings on behalf of the police.
The following jury were empanelled:-Messrs. Heinrich Carl Oldorf, Saul Abdulla Joseph, Albrecht Wilhelm Schellass, Adolphe Maria Barradas, Philip Moellar, George Richardson, and Robert Trevelyan Head.
Counsel for the prosecution in addressing the jury said that the prisoners were indicted on two counts, one being that of wounding Mr Craig, with intend to murder, and on the second count he was charged with wounding Mr. Craig with intent to do bim grevous bodily harm. The facts shortly were that on the morning of 27th March last about ten minutes to ten Mr. Craig was inspecting the lower yard of the jail in company with Mr. Pierpoint. The three mon in the dock were prisoners in the gaol, and were working in the shed picking oakum, sitting en the south side, After visiting the yard, and when Mr. Craig was about to enter the shed, he felt a bow from behind. He im- mediately turned round and found himself confronted with the first and second prisoners who had weapons in their hands. He felt a blow on the head with a knife, and as he turned round he noticed the third prisoner entering the shed. He also had a weapon in his hands and was evidently making for the assistance of the other two prisoners. But before much damage could be done the three prisoners were secured, and the weapons taken away from them. Two of these weapons were in the shape of knives and the third was a plane iron, but neither one of them belonged to the gaol-they had evidently been taken in surreptitiously, for they did not form part of the implements used in the gaol. These three men were charged at the Magistracy on the 2nd April, and they admitted the charge. Yes terday they had pleaded guilty on both counts in the indictment, but said they wished to call certain evidence with a view of showing that they were illtreated in the gaol. Under His Lordship's advice they withdrew the ples of guilly, and the evidence they wished to call had been brought down from the gaol.
Robert Henry Craig said he had been in his resent position as Assistant Superintendent of the gaol for two years come May. Before that he was chief arder for four years. Before
|
sufficiently recovered.
Cross examined by the first prisoner. Will you tell the court what quantity of rice is allowed by the Government to each prisoner daily -It depends upon the class of labour im- posed.
Is it a standing rule of the Victoria Gaol that the warders and Assistant Superintendent are at liberty to assault- a prisoner at any time in the day ?-No, my Lord.
Are there a number of balls all over the building in the Victoria Gaol for prisoners to pull at when they desire to make complaints to the warders if anything goes wrong? The bells are fixed by regulations, my Lord, and the prisoners are allowed to use them to make any complaints they have.
J
Then why did you put me on 14 ounces a day for six months?-The first six months of your sentence was solitary confinement, and, during that time, yon received 20 ounces a day.
Witness: That's a mistake. 17 ounces of rice is right.
Prisoner-This witness tells you nothing but a tissue of lies. One time he says one quantity of rice, sud the next minute he says another quantity. I wish him to be accurate on this question of diet. Did he not give me 14 ounces Instead of 17 or 20 ounces P-No, my lord.
Are you not aware that, on several occisions, when I found the rice was not enough, I went to the cook-house and weighed it and found my complaint was well founded P-I am not aware.
Is it not the fact that you gave orders to the turnkey in charge of the cooking department to supply me with fourteen ounces of rice and no more?
His Lordship-He denied that already. Prisoner-Well, I csu prove that by calling the turnkey in charge of the department. Is it not the fact that according to the gaol regula- tions a prisoner is entitled to have four ounces of bread each week after six months of confine- ment -No, my lord.
His Lordship: If you can find the regula- tion as to complaints please read it out,
Witness: It is No 236. It says that prisoners who have any complaint to make regarding the diet furnished to them, or who wished their diet to be weighed or measured to ascertain whether they were supplied with the authorised quantity, should make their complaint immediately their diet was handed to them, and it should be weighed or mea. sured in their presence, and in that of the officer deputed for that purpose. Repeated ! His Lordship-So far, you have entirely complaints of a groundless nature made by any failed to prove it. Has he made any complaint prisoner under colour of that rule with the to the Visiting Justices ? evident purpose of giving annoyance or trouble, should be treated as a breach of prison dis- cipline, and the offender would be liable to punishment accordingly.
Do you remember that on one occasion I rang the ball and made a complaint about the food-that it was not enough?
Witness: He complained on Dec. 24th, 1901, of having no oil in his rico, and he complainet again on 17th September, 1900, of not having sufficient food.
His Lordship-And what was the result of that complaint?
Witness-It was received too late. He re ceived his food on one day and made the com- plaint on the next. The complaint was noted. He complained also, my lord, on the 17th Sep- tomber, 1900, about not getting enough food.
His Lordship-Was that complaint attended to?
Witness-The reply was made that he was receiving regulation diet
The first prisoner—On the day of the assault did I not make a complaint that I got 14 ounces instead of 26 ounces of rice?-No, my Lord. He did not make any complaint.
|
Prisoner-The cutting down of my-food with ont any reasonable or just cause is illtreatment, and I must explain.
Witness-I think one, my lord. Prisoners 114 and 115 complained of low diet to the Visit- ing Justices, on 7th August, m
His Lordship-The Justices inquired as to his food and found he was still on separate diet
17 ounces a day. If he found the diet a little low, the only remedy I can suggest is that he should not get into prison.
Prisoner-Do you remember some time last year Mr. Robinson and Mr. Tooker went to the gaol as Visiting Justices, and I complained to them about my diet ?—Mr. Robinson and Mr. Tooker visited the gaol on 24th October owing to a complaint regarding the quantity of food. They carefully investigated the complaint, and found the food good and sound. -
His Lordship Ask him if he complained that time ?
Witness Yes, I did complain to the Justices of the Peace, my lord, that the quantity of riow- was only 22 ounces instead of 28.-
His Lordship-I see the Juations made two recommendations; were they attended to ?
Witness--They ttended to His Lordship
from Justices)
the quantity of foo and we found
Did you not, after I made this complaint, order me to be flogged with a dosen cuts Padd
- His Lordship You have no power to order a | the portions flogging?
are pleased to note that
mitted