21:18 72
THE HONG KONG WEEKLY PRESS &
FINE FOR PERJURY. later the acting rank was taken
NEW EVIDENCE IN THE
SUMMARY COURT.
TANGLED MOTOR-CYCLE
TRANSACTION.
In a recent action in the Summary Court, involving the cost of a motor cycle, Mr. Justice Lindsell decided against the plaintiff with costs. Plaintiff was also fined $100, or four weeks' hard labour, his Lordship holding that he had com- mitted perjury in the witness-box. At the hearing of that action Mr. F. C. E. Rendall appeared for the plaintiff, Kartar Singh, and Mr. H. J. Armstrong was for the defendant, Mohinder Singh, A.S.P.
was
Mr. Rendall, in asking his Lord- ship on Wednesday to reconsider the case, said that he only doing so in respect of the fine, as certain information had come to his knowledge since the hearing of the action which would have material bearing on the perjury charge. He asked that Mr. Bishen Singh be recalled to give evidence, and his Lordship agreed to this
course.
au
In evidence, Mr. Bishen Singh said that there was an earlier case in August last year between Kartar Singh and Mohinder Singh.
Wit- ness, together with Nawab Khan, acted as arbitrators in the dispute and it was agreed that the matter should be settled by Mohinder Singh paying to Kartar Singh the sum of $125.
In answer to Mr. Rendall, witness agreed that at the time of this settlement Kartar Singh also men- tioned another claim which he had against Mohinder Singh in connec- tion with a motor cycle. This matter was not investigated as Buntar Singh, another man concern-
Did he tell you that a few days
away?—Yes.
regard Questioned in
to the settlement last August, witness said that Mohinder Singh did not agree to anything and he had to be forced to agree.
In regard to the present action, witness said that Kartar Singh ap- proached him with a view to a settlement after the writ had been issued. Witness took steps to bring about a settlement and suggested to Mohinder Singh that he should come and discuss the matter, but the latter refused to do so.
Answering another question, wit- ness said that the present case was discussed by Sapooran Singh and a number of other people at the Witness Oriental Provision Store.
was present at this discussion when Kartar Singh agreed to withdraw his claim.
Fine Remitted.
At the close of the hearing, his Lordship said that, in view of the new evidence, although he was not satisfied that the plaintiff spoke the truth, he would remit the fine.
Mr. Armstrong raised the ques- tion of his costs for the day. His Lordship held that Mr. Armstrong's attendance was not necessary, although he was there to watch the proceedings on behalf of his client, and therefore he was not entitled to costs.
Mr. Armstrong further asked if a statement could be male that the allegations against his client, as had been made during the after- | noon, were unfounded. His Lord- ship replied that he did not see how he could make such a statement for the reason already stated in the application for costs.
ed in the deal, was not then in the FORGED BANKNOTES
Colony.
Cycle Given as Gift.
After questioning witness on the facts of the motor cycle deal, Mr. Rendall explained that Buntar Singh had been a police constable in 1928, and that he had made a present of the cycle to Mohinder Singh. Buntar Singh's brother owned public motor-ears and Kartar Singh (plaintiff) worker as a driver under him. The cost of the cycle had, in fact, been deducted from the wages of Kartar Singh, who acted as a middle-man in the trans- fer of the machine to the defendant. At a later stage Mr. Rendall said that the gift was in the nature of a bribe in order to secure promo- tion.
Mr. Rendall (to witness): Were you told by Kartar Singh that the reason why the cycle was given as a gift was to secure promotion for Buntar Singh from constable to ser- geant?-Yes.
Was that promise fulfilled?--I don't know.
Mr. Justice Lindsell: What did Kartar Singh say?-He said that Buntar Singh had got his promo- tion.
Short-lived Promotion.
Rendall:
prom
Did he tell you
CHINESE GETS ONE
MONTH'S HARD.
The case against Leung Kau, who was charged before Mr. Fraser at the Kowloon Magistracy with (1) uttering a forged Chartered Bank $100 uote and (2) possession of a forged Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank 10 note, was con- cluded on August 20. His Worship found the defendant guilty on the second charge and sentenced him to que month's hard labour.
It will be recalled, that defen- dant denied knowledge that the $100 note was a forgery but ad- mitted knowledge of the forged $10 note, which, he said, he had no intention of using.
He said he received the $100 note in the course of a business transac- tion, but he could not remember where he obtained it. The reason why he bought $2 worth of rice with the $100 note was because if he went to the money-changer's, he would lose a little discount. whereas if he bought something with it, he would not lose any-
thing. s to acting
(Continued on next Column.)
[August 28, 1931
'WHERE TO STAY IN ENGLAND.”
SELSDON PARK HOTEL,
SANDERSTEAD, SURREY, ENCLAND.
Only half-an-hour from the City and West End, yet in the midst of the beautiful scenery of the Surrey Hills, the SELSDON PARK HOTEL is the largest Hotel with its own private 18 hole golf course within daily reach of London.
Overseas visitors are specially catered for: central heating throughout, radiators in every public room, bedroom and corridor, making the Hotel an ideal winter residence. Hot and cold water and telephone in every bedroom. Numerous suites and rooms with private bathrooms.
FREE GOLF ON PRIVATE 18-HOLE
COURSE (6,355 yards) IN OWN PARK OF 230 ACRES.
Billiards, tennis, dancing and luxurious car service between Hotel and Station. All free.
REDUCED WINTER TERMS FROM OCTOBER 1.
SOUTHAMPTON HAMTUN HOUSE HOTEL,
HULSE ROAD.
A.A.
R.A.C. Overlooking County Cricket Ground. Central Heating. Gas Fires in all Bedrooms.
Excellent Cuisine. Garage: 20 Cars. Good Centre for Motor Tours. Terms from £3. 3. 0 Weekly. Telephone: 2766
What Search Revealed.
In reviewing the case, his Wor- ship said the defendant was first confronted with a charge of utter- ing a forged $100 note. A search of his house by the police revealed that he had another forged note hidden under the mattress of his bed. The fact that he had another forged note in his possession might have some weight with regard to the first charge.
The defendant had, on the other hand, given his proper address and was perfectly willing to go to the Police Station when asked to do So. He must have either thought himself very
did not know that the note he had passed was a forgery.
ΟΥ secure
Benefit of the Doubt.
IES Worship went on to say that he was not convinced that defen- dant definitely knew that the $100 note was a forgery. There was a possibility that he did not know, and his Worship would give him the benefit of the doubt. The first charge against him would therefore be dismissed.
With regard to the second charge, his Worship passed sentence of one mouth's hard labour.