486
Tell us the name of the Europeans who were mentioned Allen and Reek.
Then you did not give him a truthful answer the question when he asked you if any names had been mentioned in the matter ?--I did not do it with any intention to catch him in his words. I told him the names of Euro- peans had been mentioned,
What other names of Europeans had been mentioned in connection with the crime? None, So far as I know I have said exactly the same as I said in the Police Court. I have no object in not doing so. There was a special object in going to the goal to interview my client at that time, namely, that there was another person implicated in it, as I thought. I thought it was my duty to see what my client bad to say in the matter before I advised him how to plead on the following day at the Sessions.
Did you or did you not urge him to confess and admit that Allen was at the back of him ? I did not urge him at all.
* What did you say I told him this state- ment was in our possession and made by Allen; that it bore out and corroborated all the details that he himself had given on April 3rd, and that being the case it clearly showed that there was somebody at the back of it..
What brought you up to the goal on April 17th PA chair. (Laughter.)
Don't you be impertinent, Mr. Hays; yon know perfectly well I did not ask you how you went up. I went there because I wanted to see my client.
Impertinence won't serve your part, or that of the prosecution.-I wanted to find out the real truth with reference to the remark which Yeung Kun had let fall at the Police Court at the previous hearing. He said within the hear ing of one of the warders, "I shall tell the whole truth about the matter," and after being told that I thought there must be something at the back of the whole thing, and I urged him to tell the truth. I said, "I think it will be better for you to make a clean breast of the whole thing.
Did you ask him any questions as to whether any person had been stirring him to get this evidence ? Yes, and he told me a man by the name of Allen in the Naval Yard had on various occasions visited him and asked him in Chinese to strike Reek or to find somebody to strike him, and that he had given him instructions to buy corrosive finid. I told him that if he made a clean breast of the whole thing and stated that he had been incited to do it by another person, it might have some effect on his sentence.
Detective Inspector Cuthbert proved the arrest, and
Mr. Francis addressed the jury for the defence. He said that the prisoner, he thought he might safely say, had been charged upon the most slender evidence which could ever have
|
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
box that day. Mr, Haya" evidence would make them believe that Allen had gone to Messrs. Johnson, Stokes and Master's other than on his own account, whereas he went there at the
e request of Yeung Kun's father and brother, but even if the prisoner did go there with any other intention, and had even known that some harm was to be done to Mr. Reek before the offence was committed, that did not drag him within the pale of the criminal law. Counsel submitted that upon Young Kun's evidence the Crown must stand or fall, and it was of such a nature that it could not be relied upon for a moment, and he asked that his client be discharged.
His Lordship in summing up read the indictment, and the law on the subject. The story told by the first witness for the Crown was a very simple and plain one, but there were опе or two difficulties which encom- passed it In the first place there was the question of motive. It was a very serious crime to throw aitric acid upon another and was looked upon with great severity. It was a dastardly offence, and one which merited the fullest punishment. They (the jury) would have to consider whether there was any reason why the prisoner should have embarked upon that secret and disastrous course, and seek by every means in his power to secure the carrying out of that serious crime. Could they imagine that a man like the prisoner, holding a responsible position in the Naval Yard, with good service and character, would bind himself hands and feet to the coolies in the Yrd and play into the hands of the coolies for the par- pose of gratifying a personal spite. They could at once see how dangerous, unwise, and imprudent was the step which had been taken, if it was taken at all. Going through the evidence his Lordship said that it amounted to this; if they rejected the evidence of Young Kun, or failed to believe in his narrative at first, and his shifty story afterwards, then the prosecution of the Crown fell to the ground. Then there came the question of accomplices, and although it was an offence to become an accomplice to any orime, yet it had been the practice for many years for judges to tell juries that the evidence of accomplices did not weigh much unless it was strongly corroborated. Reverting to the point he had urged with reference to Yeung Kun's evidence, if they found on the other hand that his story was such that some amount of credence could be placed to it, then they had to consider the remaining evidence as to corroboration of the story. As far as regarded Mr. Hays' evidence he (his Lordship) was quite satisfied that Mr. Hays could have made no mistake in any way. He was a pro- fessional gentleman and had no reason for doing so, and he (his Lordship) thought it was more satisfactory to take the statement dictated to the shorthand writer at the time. To his Lordship's mind the most important part in the statement referred to was the mention of the names of Europeans, and he was bound to say after reading it carefully that those names were ambiguous. They might mean that the names were being brought out in the commission of this crime, but they might also mean that some Europeans at the Yard were aware of the offence, or they might mean that they did not want their names brought up as having known about the matter in any way. As Mr. Francis had stated, even if the prisoner knew they were going to commit the offence it would not be criminal. That was sound law which must be maintained. He was sure they would weigh the evidence of Young Kun carefully, for if they did not find that he spoke the truth they must reject his evidence, and then the case for the Crown fall to the ground. If they thought that there was one tittle of doubt the prisoner
(BEFORE HIS HONOUR
JURT).
ROBBERY.
[May 25, 1901.
G. WINE AND
Leong Muk and Li Koi were charged with robbery near the Rock of Love" on the Bowen Road, on 9th April last, when Ho Tsing and others were put in fear and had a jacket stolen from them.
Mr. Robinson took the place of the Acting Attorney-General,
The prisoners denied the charge, and the following gentlemen were were empanelled as jury-Messrs. C. J. Klinck, Jico Itami, H. E. Moon, R. Dickson, C. D. Danenberg and A. Cameron,
After evidence, the first prisoner was found guilty and sent to gaol for seven years with hard labour, and ordered to receive 20 strokes. The second prisoner was found not guilty.
BANISHMENT.
Lam Ki Kok was charged with disobeying an order of banishment,
He pleaded not guilty, and was tried before the same jury that acted in the previous case.
He was found guilty, and sent to prison for a year.
Tuesday, 21st May.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR JOHN Carring- TON, KT., C.M.G. (CHIEF JUSTICE).
:
A DEEP WATER BAY PIRACY.
Leung Tai and Cheung Kwai Chaw, were Cheung Chik Ko, Cheung Chai, Cheung, placed in the dock indicted that being armed with offensive weapons, to wit, a revolver and feloniously steal and carry away 10 fishing nets, a knife, in and upon one Cheung U, did 150 catties of fish, 3 pieces of lead, and a Åshing
line.
The Acting Attorney-General appeared for the Crown (instructed by Mr. Bowley, the Crown Solicitor) and Mr. Robinson represented
the defendant.
The following Jurors were empanelled (with Sherrington, A. dos Remedios, E. M. H. one challenge-a Chinese):-Messrs. C. W Schubart, W. A. B, Otto, D. Harvey, J. B. Perry, and C. E. Moligny,
connected with the alleged orime, stated that Mr. Pollock, in detailing the circumstances
junk, and after a day's haul dropped anchor Cheung Wu was the "skipper" of a fishing
in another junk, lowered a sampan, and in Deep Water Bay. The prisoners came along boarded the fishing boat. Two went on deck, and the others remained in the sampan. After holding up the the mate they seized the nets and fish, and “skipper" and made off.
Counsel for the defence cross-examined the with a view of showing that the prisoners wers witnesses for the Crown at considerable length, fishers, and that the prosecutor, with others, had cut their lines. A general melee followed, which ended in their arrest. The arms they had, counsel stated, were those for which they had taken out a licence.
Wednesday, 22nd April.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS."
been brought before a criminal court. The case for the Crown was that he had induced Lo Tsoi to commit the offence through his agent, Young Kun, the first witness who had been called for the prosecution, and that case depended wholly and entirely upon the evidence of that witness and upon his evidence alone. The Crown had done in the present case as they always unnecessarily did; they had endeavoured to show the prisoner had some motive and grudge against Mr. Reek in instigating Lo Tsio to throw the fluid. He (Mr. Francis) thought it was absolutely impossible to get a jury to suppose and believe that any man in his senses would go ont of his way to pay money to a Chinaman to inflict an injury upon another European unless he had some gradge or ill-will against him, and it was absolutely impossible to sup- pose that he (the prisoner) having no grudge or ill-feeling against another, would either pay Chinaman to injure him or get someone else to do it. Mr. Reek had stood in the box, and should have the benefit of it. He left the had given the prisoner an excellent charac case confidently in their hands, feeling con- ter. His (counsel's) client had been directly vinced that the main issue would be kept in under Mr. Reek, and the relations between view, that of the evidence of the first witness, resumned yesterd y. them had been most cordial, and there was If that failed then the Crown had lost their case no earthly reason why he should have com- and the prisoner was entitled to his discharge. mitted the crime imputed to him. Counsel then The jury without retiring returned a verdict went on to deal with the evidence. Dealing of "Not guilty." It was received with with Mr. Hays statement in the box, Mr. plause, which was at once suppressed. Francis
is said that it differed materially from that which had been given by that gentle- man in the Police Court and in the
|
"
The Court was densely crowded the day, and considerable public interest manifested in the proceedings.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR John CarRING- TON, KT., C.M.G. (CHIEF JUSTION).
THE DEEP WATER BAT PIRACY. The further hearing of the indictment against
the three men who were alleged to have been ton derned in the Deep Water Bay piracy was
the been
guilty
the birch
Crown witnesses, and the production
After a severe cross-examination of the fishing nets which were alleged cut, the jury found the 1 they were each sen imprisonment, with 20 strok during the first week of their This closed the Sessiona.