CO129-003 - Foreign Office - 1843 — Page 240

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed
Series Prev Next

232

letter in this Form

for the double purpose

of pointing out the want of form irregularities in the marine

and

magistrate's proceedings, and of communicating

his

wishes with respect to their revision.

of

the

In the first place, it is to be observed that the Marine Magistrate has treated the case as a civil prosecution between Plaintiff and Defendant; instead of recording it as a prosecution in the name of the Queen against the Prisoner, and then detailing the charge in full.

In the second place, the first witness called is styled the Plaintiff, and most of the other witnesses called forward styled witnesses for the Plaintiff instead of for the Prosecution.

All these witnesses should have been

"called into Court and duly sworn and their evidence afterwards recorded, and it does not appear on the proceedings whether Winchester's examination was upon oath or not. If not, it is obviously necessary that it should have been.

The Prisoner had, I presume, the option

of cross-examining all the witnesses for the Prosecutor, but that fact should have been distinctly stated before each witness was allowed to withdraw,

and it ought also to have been stated that the prisoner was invited

to make

any

defence

and to

call

any

additional

witnesses whom

he thought proper in support of his defence (if he made any).

He should

also

Page 240

Page 241

Edit History

2026-05-16 10:01:35 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
232 letter in this Form for the double purpose of pointing out the want of form irregularities in the marine and magistrate's proceedings, and of communicating his wishes with respect to their revision. of the In the first place, it is to be observed that the Marine Magistrate has treated the case as a civil prosecution between Plaintiff and Defendant; instead of recording it as a prosecution in the name of the Queen against the Prisoner, and then detailing the charge in full. In the second place, the first witness called is styled the Plaintiff, and most of the other witnesses called forward styled witnesses for the Plaintiff instead of for the Prosecution. All these witnesses should have been "called into Court and duly sworn and their evidence afterwards recorded, and it does not appear on the proceedings whether Winchester's examination was upon oath or not. If not, it is obviously necessary that it should have been. The Prisoner had, I presume, the option of cross-examining all the witnesses for the Prosecutor, but that fact should have been distinctly stated before each witness was allowed to withdraw, and it ought also to have been stated that the prisoner was invited to make any defence and to call any additional witnesses whom he thought proper in support of his defence (if he made any). He should also Page 240 Page 241
Baseline (Original)
232 letter in this Foru for the double purpose of pointing out the want of form irregularities in the marine and magistrate's proceedings, and of cormanciating hey wishes with respect to their recrsion. of the In the first place, it is to be observed that the Marine Magistrate has treated the case as a zivil proxecution between Plaintiff and Defendant; mistied recording it as a proxecution home of the queen against the Prisoner, and then detailing the charge in full. In the second place, the first witness called is styled the Plaintiff, and most of the other witnesses called forward atyted withnesses for the Plaintiff matead of for the Prosecution lave 2 All there withcusses should have been "called V // "called into Cowit and duly sworn and their evidence afterwards recorded, and it does not appear on the proceeding Whether & Winchester's reaccination was upon bath or not. If not, it is obviously necessary that it should have been LO The Prisoner had, Ipresume, the option of crop examining all the witnesses for the Prosecutor, but that fact should have been distinctly stated before rack wiharep was allowed to withdraw, and it ought alas to have been stated that the prisoner was invited to make call he any any defence additional he liked and to witnesses whom thought proper in support afkis defence (if he made ase any). He should also Page 240Page 241
2026-05-16 10:01:35 · Baseline
View content

232

letter in this Foru

for the double purpose

of pointing out the want of form irregularities in the marine

and

magistrate's proceedings, and of cormanciating

hey

wishes with respect to their recrsion.

of

the

In the first place, it is to be observed that the Marine Magistrate has treated the case as a zivil proxecution between Plaintiff and Defendant; mistied recording it as a proxecution home of the queen against the Prisoner, and then detailing the charge in full.

In the second place, the first witness called is styled the Plaintiff, and most of the other witnesses called forward atyted withnesses for the Plaintiff matead of for the Prosecution

lave 2

All there withcusses should have been

"called

V

//

"called into Cowit and duly sworn and their evidence afterwards recorded, and it does not appear on the proceeding Whether & Winchester's reaccination was upon bath or not. If not, it is obviously necessary that it should have

been

LO

The Prisoner had, Ipresume, the option

of crop examining all the witnesses for the Prosecutor, but that fact should have been distinctly stated before rack wiharep was allowed to withdraw,

and it ought alas to have been stated that the prisoner was invited

to make

call

he

any

any defence

additional

he liked and to

witnesses whom

thought proper in support afkis defence (if he made

ase any).

He should

also

Page 240Page 241

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.