REPORT
235
In 9649/66
of the Attorney General on the Petition of the Portuguese Community of Hongkong in relation to the Decision of Chief Justice SMALE in the Case of REG. v. SOUZA.
No. 681, 1869.
1. The Case of REG. v. Souza which has given rise to this Petition may be looked upon as a sequel to the Case of REG. v. SAINT, which was the subject of a recent Despatch from this Government to the Secretary of State. In my Report upon that Case which will be found at page 13 of the Printed Papers accompanying the Despatch referred to, I took occasion to observe that "certain enemies and political opponents of the Macao Government, avail themselves of English and Portuguese Newspapers printed in Hongkong, where there is a large Portuguese Community, to make the gravest charges against the Officials of their own Settlement."
See Enclosure 1, Pages 1-3 and 7-8.
2. In the first Case (REG. v. SAINT) the Defendant was the Editor of an English Newspaper, the Evening Mail. In the present Case (REG. v. SOUZA) the Defendant is the Editor of a Portuguese Newspaper, the Echo do Povo (Echo of the People).
3. The latter Newspaper, which is noted for the audacious and malignant character of its Libels, recently published certain articles charging Mr. Marques PEREIRA, a gentleman holding the office of Procurador at Macao, with corrupt practices in the discharge of his official duties.
4. One of those articles accuses him of having received Bribes from the Chinese through the instrumentality of his wife, and a particular instance is mentioned so circumstantially as to give a color of truth to the story; but from what I have heard here and at Macao, the general impression seems to be that the whole article is a tissue of falsehood. Mr. MARQUES PEREIRA instantly came to Hongkong, and prosecuted the Editor criminally.
5. In the Case of REG. v. SAINT, the person libelled was Senhor AMARAL, late Governor of Macao, and afterwards Minister of Marine in Portugal, and Mr. H. J. BALL, who was Acting Attorney General during my absence, thought it desirable to file an ex officio Information. But the Chief Justice decided, upon a Demurrer to the Plea of Justification, that the Newspaper attack against Governor AMARAL did not amount to a Libel, and that the Acting Attorney General had no power to file an ex officio Information.
6. The present Case of REG. v. Souza, however, was initiated by Mr. MARQUES PEREIRA as a Private Prosecution under Ordinance No. 3 of 1865. The Defendant was committed for Trial by the Magistrate, and after examining the Depositions, I signed the usual Information under Section 4 of the Ordinance, which is equivalent to the finding of a "true Bill" by a Grand Jury in England. The Prosecutor appeared at the Supreme Court by his Counsel in the manner provided by Sections 15 to 19.
REPORT
235
In 9649/66
of the Attorney General on the Petition of the Portuguese
Community of Hongkong in relation to the Decision of Chief Justice SMALE in the Case of REG. v. SOUZA.
No. 681, 1869.
1. The Case of REG. v. Souza which has given rise to this Petition may be looked upon as a sequel to the Case of REG. v, SAINT, which was the subject of a Governor to Secretary of State, recent Despatch from this Government to the Secretary of State. In my Report upon that Case which will be found at page 13 of the Printed Papers accompanying See Enclosure 1, raga 13. the Despatch referred to, I took occasion to observe that "certain enemies and 'political opponents of the Macao Government, avail themselves of English and "Portuguese Newspapers printed in Hongkong, where there is a large Portuguese Community, to make the gravest charges against the Officials of their own "Settlement."
See Enclosure 1, Pages 1-3 and 7-8,
ko lu
L
2. In the first Case (REG. v. SAINT) the Defendant was the Editor of an English Newspaper, the Evening Mail. In the present Case (REG. v. SOUZA) the Defendant is the Editor of a Portuguese Newspaper the Echo do Povo (Echo of the People).
3. The latter Newspaper, which is noted for the audacious and malignant character of its Libels, recently published certain articles charging Mr. Marques PEREIRA, a gentleman holding the office of Procurador at Macao, with corrupt practices in the discharge of his official duties.
4. One of those articles accuses him of having received Bribes from the Chinese through the instrumentality of his wife, and a particular instance is mentioned so circumstantially as to give a color of truth to the story; but from what I have heard here and at Macao, the general impression seems to be that the whole article is a tissue of falsehood. Mr. MARQUES PEREIRA instantly came to Hongkong, aud prosecuted the Editor criminally,
5. In the Case of REG. 2. SAINT, the person libelled was Senhor AMARAL, late Governor of Macao, and afterwards Minister of Marine in Portugal, and Mr. H. J. BALL, who was Acting Attorney General during my absence, thought it desirable to file an ex officio Information. But the Chief Justice decided, upon a Demurrer to the Plea of Justification, that the Newspaper attack against Governor AMARAL did not amount to a Libel, and that the Acting Attorney General, had no power to file an ex officio Information.
6. The present Case of REG. v. Souza, however, was initiated by Mr. MARQUES The Defendant PEREIRA as a Private Prosecution under Ordinance No. 3 of 1865. was committed for Trial by the Magistrate, and after examining the Depositions, I signed the usual Information under Section 4 of the Ordinance, which is equi- The Prose- valent to the finding of a "true Bill" by a Grand Jury in England. cntor appeared at the Supreme Court by his Counsel in the manner provided by Sections 15 to 19.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.