26
REGINA v. LOGAN.
sumptions was that of innocence, and it was so present hearing. He stated also he was only important that it could not be set aside except thres Chinese foot from the prisoner when ing by such evidence as would establish crimi. fired, and he (Mr. Wise) thought the jury wote. nality to a moral certainty. Mr. Wise thought believe that evidence in preference to what he the jury would conclude on the evidence that had said before them, that he meant he was that there had been more than one shot fired at any distance from two foroiguers behind the prisoner. rate, as the woman to the west could not have When he was before the Consul tha whole affair been wounded by the same shot as killed the boy, was fresher upon his memory, unless previous to He would argas that two shots were fired on the those proceedings bis recollection had been bridge, and he did not say what was fired at the refreshed by being told what to say. If what he west to wound the woman, as that was not part | said then was true, auyone who saw the prisoner of his oase. This was supported by the witness fire must have sesu him also. The man who said Wong Nam Po, who said he heard two shots | bo put his head round the corner, however, and after the prisoner went to the bridge, and that saw the shot fired, said he saw no Chinaman near there was an interval between them. Upon the the prisoner, and he must have seen the witness evidence there were at least thres foreigners had he been where he stated. This, he submitted, upon the bridge, and ono mau said four, and he was farther corroboration of his contention of was going to contend that the person who bad the prisoner having fired the revolver and someone the revolver was a different person to the one else the carbine. Mr. Wise then called the atten- who had the carbinc-that the prisoner had a tion of the jury to the discrepancy between the revolver but no carbine. In support of that evidence of the witness Fang Lun Kok, and the theory he pointed out the fact that though two deposition taken of his testimony at the prelimi revolvers, and cartridges to fit them, had been nary examination. In the deposition the man found in the prisoner's house, no carbine had said he saw the prisoner get a pistol about a bean found there, nor any cartridges for it, which Chinese foot loug, and the foreignor's boy handed ho would probably have had, if he had a carbine. him some cartridges. Tho evidence now given The prosecution might say he had hidden the on bobalf of the prosecution was that the man carbine, but if this was so why had he not hidden who roceived the caruine received it from a the revolvers also ? If he had hidden one, he would woman in the house, and that again supported naturally have hiddon the others also. This had his theory as to there being two weapons used by not been done and it was, he contended, a strong separato individuals. On the second day of this support to his argument that the killing of the trial, however, when it was found to be de. boy and the wounding of the man was done by sirable that this mystery between the pistol and the carbine, and that the prisoner had no carbine, the carbine should be cleared up, he came with Jobuson had distinctly stated that it was the his story altered, and with several additions, black pistol which the prisoner fired, and that He was the only witness who deposed to the fact weapon appeared to him to be an ordinary ball of a change of weapons being mile, and he (Mr. dog revolver. The evidence showed that it was Wise) would submit that this was all new, and a distance of 133 feet from the bridge to the was done to make the story fit in. The only corver of the cross-street, where the boy was European evidence to support the idea of a car- killed, and was it likely that that revolver, with | bine being used by the prisoner was that of such a short barrel could carry 133 feet, and then Ström, who said he was thirty yards distant go straight through the body of this boy and from the prisonor, and he thought he saw a car- then through the buttocks of a man bohind kim, į bine in his band, but his only reason for think. and after that to have disappeared somewhere? Hoj ing this was what he had heard. When the thought the jury would be of opinion that that was man was close to him he said he thought he saw more than could be dous by the weapon pointed out | a revolver. Fung Lun Kok introduced a wea- by Johnson. This strongly supported his argu. pon different to those mentioned by any of the ment that the weapon which inflated these wounds other witnesses-a pistol longer than any of the was a carbine, whilst the evidence of Johnson | showed that he only had a revolver, and no carbine. Tho jary might for their own opinion as to who fired the curbine, but all that it was necessary for them to do was to decide whether or not it was fired by the prisoner. Mr. Wise proceeded to call attention to the deposition of the wituoss Lea Chok Wan, taken before the Consal, i 1 which he was understood to say that he saw the prisoner with a revolver in each hand, and the other stato. ments which he had contradicted during the
REGINA v. LOGAN.
27
apon the prisoner used as much the same ss about it. As to the question of clothes, Mr. nose produced, while Matsen also said the pri- Wise contended that Neilsen was dreased in soner had a revolver, as did Chow Che Kwai, the white. Ström had said so, and one of the Chi- manager of the Hing Kee shop, and Johnson nese witnesses the first day bad said at first that told them that when he and the prisoner went all the foreigners were in white, and then two nf to that shop, Logan was carrying in his hand the foreigners were dressed in white and one in the same weapon he was firing on the bridge. black, and it was not till they saw the line the With regard to Johnson's evidence, he was a defence was taking that they all remembered witness called for the prosecution, and he (Mr. the prisoner was in white clothes and the other He should therefore con. Wise) would ask the jury to take that evidence two in dark clothes.
WAN
At
any
as true. He would submit to them that the tend that the death of the boy was caused by a whole trouble was caused in the first instance carbine, and the Chinese had mistaken someone by Neilsen striking or kicking the dog at the else who had fired it for the prisoner, as it was shop at the corner turning into Nam Ngon-street, proved that ho fired a revolver, and he thought It would be remembered that the witness who the jury would agree with him it was not likely was in that shop said that his dog was struck such a weapon should send a bullet 133 foet while lying at his door by a foreigner who was to do the mischief that appeared to have Johnson had said the revolver passing-a tall man dressed in white. The pri- been done. soner and Johnson found Neilson struggling was fired into the air, and thus if it killed with a lot of Chinese on coming round this the boy and wounded the man, it must bare corner, which supported this theory as to the been falling, and it was still more unlikely cause of the row. The shopman said he merely that a falling bullet would have gone through said something to himself about the foreigner these two. Mr. Wise said he regarded it as being saucy, but he thought the jury would be strange that Neilsen had not been put before them of opinion with him that the man said something as a witness, since he had elucidated the fact that to Neilsen on his dog being struck, which led the man had not left Canton until early this Neilson to strike him, and benoo the disturbance, month. The affair took place on the 12th The traces of firing in the barrels of the revolvers August, and he would leave it to the jury to con found by Mr. Cunningham were accounted for jooture whether the prosecution ought not to by the evidence of Johnson. With regard to have concinded before that time that he what Ström had said about thinking he saw the
necessary witness. a very prisoner first with a carbine and afterwards rate Neilsen had disappeared, and the carbine thought it was a revolver, if that was true he con. and cartridges had disappeared also, whether tradicted Fang Lun Kok, who said he saw the pri- there was any connection between those two soner with a pistol first and a carbine afterwards, facts he would leave to the jury to say. The ro and therefore Ström mast have been mistaken. volvers had been found in the prisoner's house. Fong Nam Po had said the prisoner struck Neilsan was the porson who appeared to have the coolies with a stick, and then went into the had the stiok and struck the dog; he was stated house and got a carbine. There was a good deal to somewhat resemble the prisoner, being a little of discrepancy about the stick. Neilsen was the taller, bat like him, a fair mau with a fair mous. man who struck the dog, and if anyone struok tache, and as it was stated that the person who the coolies with a stick it was he, aud Fong fired the carbine on the bridge stooped down, a Nam Po said it was the man who struck the coo- slight difference in height would not be seen, lies with a stick that received the carbine from Taking the evidence as a whole Mr. Wise the woman. The weight of evidence was to the thought the jury must be of opinion that there effect that the prisoner had no stick, and that it was a great crowd of Chinese, as several of the was bis boy who gave him his weapon. He would witnesses had given evidenes to that effect, and therefore contend that Yip Apiu was mistaken into the crowd being very excited, and throwing The statement contained in the saying he saw the prisoner Bring a fire. bricks, &c. arm two feet long on the bridge, when he looked opening of the case by the Crown Advocate to round the corner, and this was very probable, as the effect that the prisoner went back from the he was not likely to keep his head beyond the past to the west was contradicted by Johnson, corner long when a firearm was pointed towards and only borne out by Wong Shau Shan. This him in that narrow street. As to the evidence latter witness was also contradicted by Wong of Tam Wai Chan, his shop was 133 feet from Nam Po, for he said that when the foreigners the bridge, and he must have been mistaken as to passed his shop and struck his dog they did not the prisoner. He said prisoner knelt down up. go again to the west. Wong Shan Shan further on the bridge and fired, but Johnson had told said he was near-sighted and had not his specta- them the prisoner did not kneel down, and Mat- cles with him, though that did not appear until Ben said the same; so that there was no question he was being cross-examined as to what was done
28