}
17
256
-19401 10 d. 2ận 901
TOJ IVAN S′I
..
ano
10 10 1 i
09.
. UCU 10
1-0 16 Da
}
„Truk candlereng Li-
Dad, Pugio meant to
a caldăm o, müHTY"
.75911. Biwott !
enle nit:80 PLN BUY Jund
to tovet ni Seminte d
I
drama od png bell
BULOBAL NO giin hoini to buse
mob.viat AU BAN
PATU Dad ejuel in-I tak
Au Jeka
-k
Kita cun,ennaios keks
IN AC
10.1
t
•
X
ad dieman of*
i sve j na wolin 13 TO 10%
Roleneous, hoity Bhd Mi TOV “I
noie byizaovniar a nogo Isyqodna un 53.Jið 8000
“Youn ve ösfint booet on TI .roica960
+ પો X b><
al oil .v
..00 o:D .v Itemma :-ul la o pani .7 .8.8 :
♪ not allicella mitt oQERVAYO
bionite“ went to loc)
Tall
200ʻILOR
beji Is
JBASIS
1
MAI M
O ACA Kateh wur
1 lugu benad mar Todsiert mid
ou jullilo da, pitiaba to $ au duel
la Immodes no
It not Inver on JB010
973 0 Soutq unuk
,prio oti vÏÛ wil to Jor cuung near to nihy o 2 niddiw
**igh[ching na apribotuary
F
.ws Ing Pad 10
To fos boend
Nu pot end $ILJSJ
OMMO
court in Ex parte Kilburn, 9 Pet. 704, (U. S. Supreme Court) wherein it is said:
"A discharge of a party under a writ of habeas corpus from the process under which he is imprisoned, discharges him from any further confinement under that process, but not under any other process which may be issued against him under the same indictment.' “
Re White,
U. S. Circuit Court, Dist. of Minnesota,
45, Federal Reporter, p. 237.
The order discharging the writ was affirmed.
It will be noted that in this case the judge goes very fully into the question of res adjudicata and to what extent it may be invoked.
The decision has since been cited with approval.
CANADA.
While not precisely covered by the request, I venture to include the following Canadian decision in the belief that the Colonial Govern- -ment will not object to pertinent information from any source and it being possible that the case is not to be found or has not been found
in the law libraries of Hongkong:
*Application is made for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of
Harsha in custody on the grounds:-
(1) That the prisoner was arrested a second time for the same offence after his release on habeas corpus.
(2) That the matter was res judicata between the parti.
-es.
(3) That the complaint against the prisoner was on
information and belief only.
(4) That no evidence was received by the Judge. (5) And that neither information and complaint nor the warrant was transmitted to the minister of justice
by the judge.
The Court of Appeal discharged the prisoner from custody on the ground that there was no proper evidence of the com-