April 29, 1907.)
His Bonour said he wished to consider cer- tain points and the case wase adjourned to Monday.
1
Monday, 22nd April.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
BEFORE SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF
JUSTICE).
LARCENY OF TOBACCO,
Charles Humphrey Kane, on remand, again appeared on the charge of larceny of 100) cases of "Egyptian Delight" tolacco from the British-American Tobaren Company.
The Attorney-General prosecuted, and Mr. H. G. Calthrop, instructed by Mr. G. K. Hall Brutton (of Messrs. Brutton and Heit), appeared for the defeudant.
cer.
Mr. Calthrop, in re-opening the hearing, said it was a rule of practice that a jury ought to be told they ought not to enrict unless they thought the evidence of the accomplice was corroborated. Evidently the British-American Tobacco Company did not think this "Egyptian Delight" tohicco had any commercial valu when they carried it thousands of miles by sea to destroy it at West Point. This was tainly a peculiar circumstance which manager stated had been carried
on before his time. In the first instance the witness Hon Kwai pleaded guilty to the larceny of this tobacco, but the prosecution withdrew the charge. Of course, on this account, the witness would be very grateful, and wish to assist them, and the way he did so was by saying Kane took the tobacco.
he
the
in order
The Attorney-General then addressed the jury. He said a man had a right to do what be liked with his own properly, and if it was of a quality to interfere with the sale of his specialty
was at liberty to distrop it to prevent it falling into the hands of unscrupulous persons who might use it to adulterate superior qualities, and in other ways bring those qualities into disrepute with the consuming public. There were thus good and sufficient reasons for the distruction of this property, and if a person charged to destroy it converted it to his own use it was theft, just as much as taking a purse out of another person's pocket. The prisoner had told them his salary was $80 a month, but he would not press that matter home, as the jury could draw their own inference from the spectacle of an 880 a month man living a 8500 life.
His Lordship then summed up at length, and directed the jurors, who retired.
|
|
The jury came back twice, the foreman reporting that they had been unable to agree, I and on each occasion they were directed by his Honour to retire, and endeavour to arrive at a unanimous verdict.
They returned for the third time 2.5, when The foreman announced - We are still of the same opinion-four to three.
The Chief Justice-Then there must be retrial. I ought not to sit again, I think. It will be better if Mr. Justice Wise takes the
case.
The jury was discharged, and after the usual details bad been arranged, the Sessions were adjourned,
THE POST OFFICE FORGERIES. Chan Wo and Chan Lam were indicted on charges of forgery, uttering a forged document and obtaining goods by means of a forged document,
A
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE RÉPORT.
accused were arrested later and certain cheq nes were found in their possession.
His Lordship stid the offence was a vers serions one and sentenced each of the defeudanta to seven years' imprisonment with hard labour.
Wednesday, April 24th.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
Before Mr. A. G. Wise (Prisse Joperl
NATURAL AFFECTION.
|
An interesting point arose in the hearing of the action Chan Tun Por Yn Wai Chenng. Ya Ngoi Cheung and Yu Chau Cheang, the suggestion being that the natural affection of the sons for the father was not sufficient c›n› sideration for guarante-ing repayment of the decessid father's debts. The plaintiff, whose case was conducted by Mr. E. J. Grist sued for g936,32, principal and interest dus in respect of money leat by him to the Kwong Cheung Hing Lai Kee and Ya Pai Lai. Mr Hursthouse, ! from the Crown Solicitors office, appeared for the first defendant.
Mr. Grist explained that the money WIL actually len! to the father of the three defendants, The amount lent was $1,100 and the repayment of this was guaranteed by the three 8008.
|
The Attorneys (ieneral, instructed by Mr. G. E. Morrell, Crown Solicitor, prosecuted. Prisoners who were undefended, pleaded guilty. Mr. Gompertz- stated that the accused were formerly employed by the Kwong Wo Cheong, į
firm which had large dealings with America. They knew that the firm recsired letters containing money or valuable documents ¦ by every American mail. On March 14th. when the American mail arrived the first defendant went to the Post Office and asked for the firm's letters. He was handed eleven
which he chopped, and sigued receipts
The second defendauf was waiting outside for the first, and together they went to the China Hotel where they opened the letters. Meanwhile the firm sent for their letters and told that they had already been delivered. The
ΠΑΡΑ
Plaintiff gave evidence of leading the money, 8220 had been paid on ace unt of principsl, and interest had also been paid. Five or six days sgo he asked Yu Wai Cheong to pay, anthe asked for time to find the money.
Mr. Harsthonse suggeste i that the guarantes was not signed in February 1901 when the money was lent hai in August 1990 after the father had died.
Plaintiff denied this.
Mr. Hursthouse. You allege that all segue] at the time the money was lent? Yes.
I put it to you that the three sons really signed in August 1966 ?
No.
Do you know that, when the father died, the autat was realised and split up between the creditors?—No.
Are you sure ?—Yes.
Did you sign the deed of composition?—I do not know exactly. If you show the deed to ma I will be able to tell you.
ilis Honour Do you remember or do you not-Yes, I Ĉid.
Mr. Hursthons, having put in the deed of assignment, asked --Now do you say you do not kuow the estate was divided up? – 1 was told to sign it by Ya Ng«i Cheung who brought me $20 and said the balance would be paid in
instalments.
Did you sign without reading it —I did not look at it.
Mr. Hursthouse pointed out that in the deed it stated "We brothers are willing to make not of indebtednes«," He said the three signatures were put on at that time and had not already been made.
The first defendant was called and said that they signed the document as they thought they
were liable for their father's debts,
¦
Į
975
of January and not having received any money for his services he left on the 5th March, Under aross-examination by Mr. Stephens, he denied having been offered $15 for two months, the saggestion being that defendant retained the remainder to preven him leaving without notice, that bing s prastics of the boy, abont which the employees of the railway frequently compl ained. Plaintiff asserted that од one occasion. at the end of February, defendant placed $7 on the table for him which he refused to take He then asked Mr. Hamilton to pay him for the one month and let the other stand over, but defendant would not acoede to this request.
Defendant told the court that he employed the boy at $10 a month. He did not pay him at the end of Jannery but at the end of February he offered him $15 saying that he would retain the other Si so as to ensure plaintiff not leaving without proper notice. The boy left at the end of February.
His Honour Well, he worked two months? Yes.
Hit Honour He is entitled to his wages. You can proeenth him for learing without
notice
Mr. Stephen«-Yas, I tell my client that, but ho wanted to come into court and explain how it was he had not paid him
His Honour Jadzment for $20.
CURIOUS MARRIAGE CASE.
I married.
PRIVILEGED BIGAMY.
A case powe«iug some unusual features came bafore. Mr. 11 izoland at the Magistracy on Apl. 24th, when Wong Yan, who is the manager of the Wong Sam Ksi sh op in Kowloon, appeared in answer to a charge of having on the 26th | January, 19kki, mida a false declaration to the Registrar General in describing himself as A
· bachelor. Th- offauce consisted in Wong declaring himself as a single man when he was time age he had wedded a woman with all the Chinese ceremonial and recently he mat another msiden whom be fa aci- ed for a wife. He went through the marriage ceremony according to the English law with her, but when wife number two was taken to his house- boll, and found that thers was another woman who disputed the place to which she was entitled, there was trouble." She lodged a complaint, with the result that Wong bad to appear before the Magistra's who adjourned the case and fired bait at $25 1. At first sight it would appear, that Wong bad committed bigamy, but apparent- ly the second marriage is the only one that is recognised by the British auth oxities.
Mr. Hursthonse argued that there was no consideration for giving such a guirantes as the boys had done. They had made themselves! liable for some $0 worth of debts without
getting a cash for it.
Me Girist baring replied, His Honour aid tharu was not so much natural affection hatween the l'hinen · and their
!
parents. The d-fendants did guarantee this paymen', for which there were many considera- tions. The money would not havi beap legt i without consideration. Judgment for plaintiff with costs against all threʻ.
Friday, April 26th
IN SUMMARy JurisdicTION,
7
MASONIC.
The District Girand Royal Arch Chapter of Hongkong and South China held its Seven. teenth Annual Meeting on April 19th, when M. E. Companion T. F. Hough presided and The following Offl-ers were invested :
District Second Grand Principal, M. E. Comp. F. Hoagh, District Third Grand Principal, M. E. Comp. W. H. Wickham;
Boribe District Grand
E. M
r. Comp. A. O'D. District Grand Boribo N. M E.
G. Comp. (.
Barnett. District Grand President B. of G. P. Gioandin, M. E. Comp, F. W. Edwards, District Grand Trosaurer, M. E, Comp. D. Mac tonald. District Grand Registrar, M. E. Comp. F. W. Clark, District Grand Sajourner, à E. Comp 8. J. Hanisch; District Grand First Ansist. Sojourner, M. E. Comp. H W. Wolfe, District Grand Beooad Assist, Sojourner, M. E Comp. If Bathurst; Distriot Grand Sword Bøaror, ál. E. Comp C. H. Grace; District tirand Standari B arers, M. z. Comp. W. J. Graham, M. E. Comp. J. Smith, M. E.
i Before Mr. A. G. Wog d'uisse Diari. Comp. It. D. Phomss, and . E Comp. E.
MASTER
AND SERVANT
¦
Lá YẪu sund R. Hamitou, overwer on the Kowloon-Caut, a Hailway, for $22 hing wagum: as cook and by for Janasry and February of this
Mr. M J. D) Stephens appeared for jar. the defendant.
The plaintiff stated that he was engaged ani cook and boy at $11 a month or the ist
Sterens. District Graud Director of Vera- monies, Comp. W. H Pareill, District Grand Dep. Director of remontas, Comp. C. W. Lingast, District Girand Lasist. Director of Ceremonies, Cump. If. Staples Smith; _Distrior Grand Jauitor, Comp. J. Vaustane. Unofficial Members ·M. E. Comp J. J. Bryan, marl M. E, Comp. E. H. Ray.