338
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
He was
[November 25, 1909.
the
Both came
the susceptibilities of any Government. The Court sat simply to administer the law as it found it, and should there appear to be mala fides in the case then the Court, in accordance with the traditions of the English bench, would not hesitate for one moment in refusing to surrender the fugitive. Counsel thought that as the case went on his Lordship would have no doubt left up on his mind that whether this man committed the offence of armed robbery on April 16th or not-which they said he did not the real object of the Chinese Go- vernment ia sending to get him was not for that robbery, but to get hold of a rebel for whom they offered £1000 reward, Sir Henry quite confidently rested his claim to habeas corpus on the grounds be had disclosed. He felt almost confident on the facts before the Court. that the Court did not believ, the witnesses who pretended to identify prisoner. They only saw him in cironmstances of confusion and terror and in semi-darkness; they did not identify him as being one of the gang. It was quite possible that a house at Pingchow was robbed on the 16th, and it was quite possible that there were fif teen or sixteen robbers there, but the prisoner was not one of them, and his name was not mentioned at the time given to the Chinese authorities. The strong case for the Government was this: bere was a man, a teacher in the house robbed and here was the wife of the man who was rubbed. forward and identified this man, but the teacher had never seen him before the night of the robbery; on the night of the robbery he heard the master before he was shot, call the fugitive's name, and then he reported the robbery to the authorities, telling them that Iu Chan was one of the leaders. That wo id seem a fairly strong case, but the last state- ment about the murder would show that the witness was telling a concocted story. He submitted that the witness did not tell the Chinese authorities at that time that the pri- sner had committed murder, otherwise it would have been in the charge. For those reasons Counsel submitted that he was en itled to ask for a 'abeas corpus to prevent this man being taken to China on a charge which had not beeu established against him. In ordinary CREEK coming before magistrates the Court as a rule did not upset the finding of a magistrate on a question of fact, but in extradition the rule was not exactly the same. In this CASO the magistrate had not, in giving his decision, given his reasons for the conclu- sion arrived at. Upon the facts as proved the prisoner ought to be discharged because of the slender nature of the evidence brought against bim. He onght also to be discharged because of the aaworthiness of the male wit- ness' evidence, His Lordship would have in his recollection that this witness deliberately swore fals-ly before the magistrate. In the course of his examination a doubt arose as to his character, He put himself forward as being a teacher only, but it was sug- gested that be was really a yamen runner and knew the prisoner well. He came here for the purpose of get ing the reward,
concocted
part of the story. He
That was a fact which Counsel desired his Why, having regard to the fact that Swatow is Lordship to bear in mind, as it was part of the within a few hours' steam of Hongkong, the basis of the argument which he intended to delay? The only legitimata inference, to any address to his Lordship. In May, then, man capable of inductive reasoning, was that there was a rising against the local Govern the armed robbery the Chinese Authorities bad ment, and during that rising a town called in their minds when the man was arrested on Wongkong was captured by the insurgents June 24th was the robbery of artos and and certain Brms, ammunition and ammunition from the Yamen at Wongkong. warlike stores were taken from the official It was that they had on their minds; it was yamen by the rebels. What might be regard that they inten led to bring forward against him, éd in ordinary circumstances as an act of bat doubtless the authorities on reflection, or on armed robbery was on that occasion committed. being advised, found that the extradition laws The rebels seized the yamen and took would not permit a man to be surrendered if the away Government weapons, etc. The next offence of armed robbery charged against him important fact was that among those who was incidental in a rising. The Case of were leading the rebels on that occasion was the Castionni was decisive on that point. fugitive before the Court. That fact was The case was a rising in one of the Cintons abundantly established on the aridence before of
the Swiss Republic against the local the magistrate. These facts were all important: administration, and in the course of that rising; the rising, the political disturbance, the revolt a deliberate act of homicide was committed against the local Government of the provinces, which appeared a somewhat unnecessary act. and the fact that the prisoner was one of the The extradition of Castionni was sought, but leaders of that political disturbance. The rising was refused on the grounds that the killing of failed for reasons not necessary or materical to a burgomaster was one of the incidents in the discuss, the insurgents were dispersed, and the rising, and the offence came under the category leaders filed. The next material fact to of that of a political character. That was which Counsel desired his Lordship's most what would have been set up here, if the careful attention was that on June 20th evidence brought by the Chinese Government! the authorities offered a reward or the to endeavour to obtain the rendition of capture of the leaders of this rising. They this leader, had been to the effect that he offered $2000, he thought, for certain of led the people to commit a robbery of arms the leaders, and they offered $1000, for, among and ammunition from the amen. Counsel pu others, the fugitive before the Court. They it to the Court that the a thorities in Cuina had it then, that on Juue 20th there was a ecame sul jects of a deception on the part reward published in the neighbourhood for of witnesses from Pingchow, and be further put $1000 for the capture of the prisoner, Now, it that these witnesses were tempted, in the in what capacity did they offer $100 for hope of getting $1000 reward, to come forward bis capture? Ou June 20th the possession of and relieve the Government of their difficulty his body was sought for by the Government by saying that they knew this man Authorities 88 8 leader of rebels, and one of fourteen people who at the dead o night that only. Од June 24th the tugitive went into a house at Pingchow some three or was discovered to be in Hongkong, and four men hs ago and committed an armed rob. on that day a requisition was made to the bery, and these witnesses were prepar. d to come authorities at Hongkong for his apprehension to Hongkong and pick him out. They on the charge of armed robbery, and he was probably said to themselves" We will have apprehended on that day. Counsel pointed out no difficulty; there are already people in that on the warrant there was no statement of Hongkong who know him, and he has been the time, the place or the person, or when or
arrested." These two people came to Hong- where the robbery was committed, or who was kong, and in due course they appeared before affected by it. There was no statement in tuat the magistrate. What did the say? They warrant that the fugitive committed the armed told their story about an armed robbery at robbery at Pingchow as was a long time after midnight on April 16th. One of them, he put wards alleged. There was no statement on the it to the Court, slightly exceeded his instruc warrant of any particular person. An open tons, and in doing so gave them an intex to warrant was issued upon which the fugitive the whole of his conduct. Not only did he say was arrested оп a charge of armed Lob.
that the fugitive committed armed robbery, but bery within the jurisdiction of China. He be said te committed murder. This man, he said, did not Bay that this was the ouly when he led his gang into the house after be instance in which a warrant had been so issued; had finished robbing the inhabitants, bappened be did not say that there was any depart to hear his name mentioned by the master and ing from custom in the issuing of this brutally shot and killed hitu. This witness warrant. What he did point out to his Lord. absolutely said that he told that fact to the ship, and what would be obvious to any person on
Chinese authorities on the night of Inth April. reflection, was that on such open warrant it was If that was true, would not the Chinese author. possible to put in any time. place and subject ities, instead of applying for his extradition on subsequently. Such a warrant would not be a charge of armed robbery have demanded his tolerated for a moment against a British subject surrender on the ground of murder. Murder was in a British Court. What magistrate would one of the subjects for extradition, and surely the issue a warrant of such a nature, and what Chinese would have demanded his rendition on Court would convict a man apon such
the superior rather than on the inferior charge, charge, if no evidence was brought as to where He put it to the Court that this excess of and when the robbery was committed
and ntil Dstructions threw such a light on the case as weeks and weeks bad elapsed when every possible to show where the truth really was. The would have the magistrate believe, and opportunity was given pers ns tempted by the Chines: Gvernment did not, ou June 24th, | apparently made the magistrato believe that reward to come forward and make false allega. when they asked for the rendition of this man he was really the literati he said he was. In tions against the accused? At the very oniset hare the facts which were subsequently put for-
the course of his examination that man made Counsel submitted that they should approach ward through the months of Luase witnesses. use of certain words in the Mandarin language. this case with the gravest possible doubt-be What they really had on their minds was the l'he fact was at once noticed by the interpreter, would ase no stronger word as to whether or at of taking from the yamen Government pro
who called the magistrate's attention to it. not a grave mistake had not been made iu porty sud the act of taking from various people, The care progressed, and when it came to alleging that this man, a man of high character inhabitauts about the place, certain supplies Counsel's turn he asked this man how it was * & standing, was guilty of the charge laid against necessary for au army of insurgents So that he spoke in Mandarin, and the witness denied
him. They could not approach the ca-e but there was no aspersion upon the Guvern-
the fact. Counsel wanted to convince the Court with a doubt that the Chinese Government bad ment of China involved in the granting of that this man was a yamen runner masquer- been deceived by witnesses tempted by the re- a habeas corpus by this Court. All that it ading as a teacher, but unbiassed against the ward, who came forward weeks afterwards to would amount to would be this: that the prisoner, and he was only soting from a high fill in the blanks left on an open warrant. Government of Chins had, subsequently to its sense of duty and justice. When the witness It was not, his Lordship would see by the requisition, evidence given to it which justifi-d
was asked in cross-examination if he spoke evidenc, until July 16th that the two witnesses it in proceeding with that requisition, but which Mandarin he said no, and denied that he had came to Hongkong from Swatow to prove the evidence the Court did not believe, and therefore spoken in that language to the interpreter. Ma case against the fugitive, as baving been one of would not permit the fugitive to be surrendered
Nolan's evidence would prove that, "however, the l-aders of a band of armed robba18 who, on
up, Before they determined to act they had this April 16th, attacked a house in Pingchow and information this false information--laid before robbed a man, The question at once suggested them. This deceived them, and in believing in itself to anyone-Why this delay? Why, if the the fal-e information they proceeded with the Chinese Government knew on June 24th that case thus far. He was not present to admit the prisoner was the man who committed the for one single moment that the Court would be robbery, did they not say so before April löt.? ́actuated or controlled by a tender regard for
L
a
|
|
❘
cases
His Lordship- He gives three words, two of which are also Cantoness.
Sir Henry Berkeley - And one Mandarin. Proceeding. Counsel said the point was that man denied having used the words, and therefore he was an unworthy witness. There was evidence to show that In Kai-Shing was
the