3 luterv
474
~ho stated: that the essential thing was to obtain the witnesses' identification of the accused. I concurred in this view and suggested that the accused should, following the course adopted in Hongkong, be confronted with the witnesses in the company of several other convicts.
Should the witnesses then experience no difficulty in identifying them, doubt as to their guilt would be removed.
U was put into affest.
The Magistrate readily assented to this plan which
—ho Ett, a passenger on 'the "Perseverance" was first heard. He repeated the evidence he had previously given in Hongkong regarding the circumstances of the piracy and stated that he could "recognize one man whose face was marked with smallpox."
The Magistrate (addressing him) told him that he would be confronted with the accused, cautioned him to be careful and make no mistake, as the penalty the accused would suffer would be death.
I considered it advisable to reassure the witness and told him that it was his duty to say whether he really recognized any of the prisoners or not, and that he had no reason to fear speaking the truth, as there would be no stigmatizing consequences to himself in so doing.
The accused were then brought in, and the witness went direct to Sheng Ya Ingenho (who was among about a dozen other prisoners) and pointed out one of the pirates. He had, he said, no doubt of the man's identity.
Chiang Finp@sailor of the "Perseverance" was next summoned. His deposition was in Hongkong regarding the circumstances of the piracy, and he declared that he could recognize two of the pirates.
Confronted with the prisoners in court, he, without the least hesitation, singled out Cheng fa In and hang Ya Kaota.
Ig_766, coxswain of the "Perseverance" gave evidence similar to that which he had previously given in Hongkong, but was unable to recognize any of the accused.
I then addressed the Magistrate and told him that, from the readiness with which the first two witnesses had recognized the prisoner Sheng Ya fu and the other the prisoners Sheng Ya Tu and hing Yu Kuoi, I had no doubt of the guilt of those two non-prisoners and asked what penalty he would impose.
The Magistrate replied that he considered them perfectly convinced of their guilt and that the punishment should be death.
I thereupon asked for a conviction, which he said he was unable to make until he had obtained a confession of their guilt from the prisoners themselves.
This he could only do under torture, as they had refused to confess of their own free will.
I replied that the Hongkong Government would, on no account, countenance the torture of the prisoners.
Thereupon, he said that his hands were completely tied; "they were guilty and they ought to be beheaded, but according to Chinese law, the punishment could not be carried out until the prisoners had signed their own confessions."