}
C.0
Enclosure.
6978
Rece Report ob Police Court Case No.2385 of 1999 Feed R. February
1998.
350
1.
The defendants in this case were charged with two offences
under two separate Ordinances. A Solicitor defended them and took no
objection to both charges being heard together, though the joinder of
oharges was brought to his notice by the Court.
2.
The first charge was laid under section 1 of Ordinance X
of 1391 which forbids any person to enter any battery, fieldwork or
fortification in the Colony, unless he is the bearer of a written :
order or is a British officer,and imposes a penalty not exceeding
$500 or imprisonment with or without hard labour not exceeding three
months..
3.
The second charge was laid under section 5 of Ordinance I
of 1395 which forbids any person possessing sketching to naterials
or apparatus from being in the immediate vicinity of any battery,"
fieldwork or fortification in HongKong with the intention of making
any sketch to of any battery, fieldwork or fortification or of any
portion thereof and laposes a penalty not exceeding $125 or at the
aiscretion of the Magistrate imprisonment with or withour hard labbur
for any period not exceeding one month..
4.
I have set out the provisions of the law under which defen-
dants were charged because close attention akst be paid to the exact
teras of the Ordinances in order to understand the nature and the
degree of the offence committed...
i