F.
I-Wong Ho, of Victoria in the island of Hong-kong, widow, do hereby solemnly and sincerely declare and say as follows:-
1.-I know the prisoner who is charged in this case under the name of Tsang Achun.
2.-The said prisoner has been my protector for more than ten years, since the death of my husband, and I have always known him by the name of Leung Afu and by no other name.
3.-The said Leung Afu has been living in Hongkong since his return from Annam in 1884.
4.-The said Leung Afu suffers from rheumatism in his legs, and during the whole of the 9th moon last year he was unable to walk without great pain and difficulty, and most of the time was confined to his bed on the top floor of No. 61, East Street, Victoria aforesaid.
And I make this solemn declaration, etc.,
WONG HO. (Her + mark.)
G.
I, Li Akit, of Victoria, in the Island of Hong-kong, coolie-house keeper, do hereby solemnly and sincerely declare and say as follows:-
1.-I am in partnership with Tam Yau, Lam Yo, and Lam Sui in a coolie lodging-house situate in Queen's Road Central, Victoria aforesaid.
2.-I know and am well acquainted with Leung Afu who is charged in this case under the name Tsang Achun.
3.-To my own knowledge the said Leung Afu resided from the 3rd moon of last year up to the date of his arrest on the top floor of No. 61, East Street, Victoria aforesaid.
4.-The said Leung Afu was ill in the 9th moon of last year, and on the evenings of the 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, and 14th days of the said 9th moon I visited him and assisted him to prepare his opium pipe, as he was too ill to do it himself.
5.-I have never heard the said prisoner called by any other name than Leung Afu previously to his being charged in this case.
And I make this solemn declaration, etc.
(Signed)
LI KIT.
I, Ng Ayuk, of Victoria in the Island of Hongkong, married woman, do hereby solemnly and sincerely declare and say as follows:--
1.-I reside at No. 90, Tank Lane, Victoria aforesaid, and am the wife of a man Chan Tik Cheung.
2.-The said Chan Tik Cheung is at present detained in Victoria Gaol, where he is under remand on a charge of burglary and murder in Chinese territory.
3.-While the charge against the said Chan Tik Cheung was proceeding before H. E. Wodehouse, Esq., one of the Magistrates of this Colony, a man named Ho Ki gave evidence on behalf of the three prisoners, of whom the said Chan Tik Cheung was one.
4.-The said Ho Ki gave material evidence for the defence of the said prisoners, and upon the above-named Leong Ayau being charged with perjury before E. Maclean, Esq., another of the Magistrates of this Colony, the said Ho Ki was examined for the prosecution and gave material evidence against the prisoner Leung Ayau.
5.-In the said charge of burglary and murder preferred against Chan Tik Cheung and others, a person described as Colonel Li Loi signed the information or petition upon which His Excellency the Acting Governor directed warrants to issue for the arrest of the said Chan Tik Cheung and others.
6.-During the prosecution of the said Chan Tik Cheung and others, the said Li Loi appeared in Court and instructed the Solicitor who was conducting the case for the prosecution.
7.-On Saturday, the 26th day of March, 1887, the said Leong Ayau was committed for trial to the Supreme Court on a charge of perjury committed in the said case against Chan Tik Cheung and others.
8.-On the following day, that is on Sunday, the 27th day of March, at about 11 a.m., the above-mentioned Ho Ki came to my house and in the presence of Chow Afung and others informed me that since he had been examined as a witness in the case of Regina v. Leong Ayau the above-named Li Loi had sent a large number of soldiers to Sam Kwai, the native village of the said Ho Ki, that he had arrested two of the gentry, two tipons, the said Ho Ki's elder brother, and several of the clansmen of the said Ho Ki, about 20 persons in all.
9.-The said Ho Ki further said that the said Li Loi had billeted about 100 soldiers in the ancestral temple of the said Ho Ki at Sam Kwai aforesaid and that the family of the said Ho Ki were compelled to supply the said soldiers with food.
10.-The said Ho Ki further said that he had been provided with clothes and a passage to Singapore and that he could not attend any further in Court to give evidence on behalf of my husband or against the said Leong Ayau, as if he did so the said Li Loi would punish him and his relations.
11.-When the said Ho Ki said this he was dressed in new clothes and was armed with a loaded revolver.
12.-I verily believe the statement of the said Ho Ki to be true and that he is prevented by the said Li Loi from attending before the Supreme Court in the trial of the said Leong Ayau to give evidence.
And I make, &c.,
(Signed)
NG AYUK. (Her + mark.)
21st April, 1887.
R. v. LEONG AYAU.
A. B. Johnson, Esq., Crown Solicitor.
Dear Sir,
We have laid the depositions in the matter before Counsel and he advises us that if the Attorney-General considers that he is unable to proceed in this case because Ho Ki's deposition before the Magistrate is unsigned and cannot therefore be given in evidence, we had better raise no objection to a nolle prosequi being entered.-Yours truly,
(Sd.) DENNYS & MOSHOP.
April 22nd, 1887.
R. v. LEONG AYAU.
A. B. Johnson, Esq.
Dear Sir,
As we understand now that Ho Ki will be able to attend at the trial of this case we have requested Mr. Brereton to draw the information and will let you have it as soon as possible.-Yours faithfully,
(Sd.) DENNYS & MOSSOP.
27th April, 1887.
REGINA v. LEONG AYAU.
Dear Sir,
I received your letter of the 22nd inst., but I have not received any information.
The Acting Attorney-General wishes me to inform you that the Sessions stand adjourned till Friday next at 10.30, when no information being filed the defendant will in the usual course be discharged by proclamation.
I am, dear sir,
Yours faithfully.
(Signed)
A. B. JOHNSON,
Crown Solicitor.
Messrs. Dennys and Mossop.
28th April, 1887.
R. v. LEONG AYAU.
A. B. Johnson, Esq., Crown Solicitor.
Dear Sir,
Mr. Brereton has sent us the draft information, which we are having copied, and will send to you the first thing in the morning.
We should be glad to hear whether the Attorney-General will apply for a special jury to try the case.
Yours faithfully,
(Sd.)
DENNYS & MOSSOP.
1.-The draft information consists of two counts.
In the first Leung Ayau is charged with unlawfully having committed wilful and corrupt perjury before Mr. H. E. Wodehouse, Magistrate, on the 7th March, in the case in which Ching Sam, U Shap, and Tsang Chun, alias Leung Afu, were charged with robbery and murder at a place called Wong Po in the district of Shan Tak in the province of Kwang-tung in Chinese Territory on the night of the 9th October 1886, by alleging that the said Tsang Chun formed one of a gang of robbers who, during the night of the 9th October, 1883, broke into a dwelling house at Taihow and forcibly took him, the said Leung Ayau, to a place called Wong Po, whereas in truth the said Tsang Chun was at the time stated in Victoria in the Colony of Hongkong.
In the second count Leung Ayau is charged with committing perjury by declaring that he had never been in gaol either in Hongkong or China and swearing that he had no prison marks on his person, whereas he had frequently been imprisoned for theft in China and had been branded on the arm and face with the marks denoting theft or thief.
Page 198