Miscellan
Office!
C
Ai
De Suity to approved by the Acting Colonial Magistrate
(
The services of Mr May having been acknowledged in the Dusjakher expered to in the above paragraph of the House(rál)
vide not, they feel cepured exccipe your Lordssige
animadvewOnI
They respectfully ask your Lordshi to doid that their present communication be added to their Memorial, and convidind cv pupplemankul” shoute"
I have the honor kebe
My Lord
Your most berduet Fervant
Erwin Pears.
General Secretary
Annex above referred to
THE HOLWORTHY MURDER. The three Chinese (Cheong Alum, Wong Akee and Lo Achoy) now in custody on a charge of having been concerned in the murder of Mr W. W. Holworthy, at the Victoria Gap, were brought up on remand on the 10th. Mr Hazeland, Crown Solicitor, appeared for the prosecution; and Mr D. R. Caldwell watched the case on the same behalf.
Loo Tuck Yau was the first prisoner called and having been cautioned, he stated that he was formerly a gambling-man, but now was out of employment.
Mr Hazeland remarked that the evidence to be produced to-day would be chiefly of conversations had with the prisoners.
Witness continued. He has knowledge of the prisoners; having met the first and second, on the 25th January, near the Monument at Wanchai, under the trees. The second prisoner he has known as a gambler for some time, for several years; he knew him also as a thief, who made money by robbery, umbrella-snatching, &c., and then came to gamble with the proceeds. The third prisoner he knows by having seen him at the gambling-places: he was known as the "great blackguard." About noon on the 25th ultimo, he saw the two prisoners (1st and 2d) near the Wan-chai Market; they were quarrelling: he (witness) had a friend with him, named Wong Achun.
Mr Hazeland objected that minute questions irrelevant to the case should not be put by the Magistrate, as they would never appear as evidence before the Supreme Court: it was mere waste of time.
Mr May remarked that it might appear a waste of time, but in a case so important he intended to test the statements made by those witnesses in every possible way. The Crown Solicitor said that the questions put were all for the defence; and it certainly was not for the Magistrate specially to look after the prisoners' defence. As for the prosecution, that was represented.
Mr May again stated that the prisoners were not defended, and that if Mr Hazeland, as representing the Crown, put all the questions for the prosecution, he would take care to do so for the case, not for the defence. This had been the course he had pursued in many hundreds of similar cases; and he was sure that the Attorney General would be very glad of all the information relative to the statements of the witnesses.
The evidence was then continued. Witness asked the prisoners what the quarrel was about, when the second prisoner told him "we three men made a watch yesterday, and are going to divide the money to-day"—meaning that they had stolen one. They also had a bank note and broken silver about them. Second prisoner said that a dollar was the cause of the dispute; second prisoner wished a dollar and five mace more than his share, and first prisoner would not let him have it.
Witness then asked for two or three dollars to drink tea, on the score that the prisoners had been making a fortune; upon which first prisoner began to use abusive language and said, "I have risked my life to get the money; why should I give it to you?" The second prisoner said that the third man had got one-half and they (1st and 2d) had got the other half, and that the quarrel rose over the $1, 5 mace, on their division.
First prisoner, in reply to witness's request for tea-money, said "It is all very well for you asking money; the second prisoner was seized by the foreigner, and his life was as cold as water (meaning that he was in great danger), when Tai-loong-ka (3d prisoner) saved him." Further, second prisoner said that the watch-robbery could not have been done in the street, but that it was fortunately on the Hill.
Witness then got the dollar and five mace about which the dispute had arisen. Second prisoner further told witness that Tai-loong-kao had got half of the money, together with the chain (which he had not divided); and then advised witness to go to him for some money. Witness then went away. On seeing next day the notices offering a $500 reward, he went to Mr Caldwell.
The witness then narrated the various steps taken towards the arrest of the prisoners—two in Hongkong, and the third in Macao.
Wong Achun, the companion of the previous witness, narrated the circumstances and conversation in almost exactly the same tenor and even detail as the first witness. The only disparity appeared to be, that this witness put it that the Macao man (nick-named Tai-loong-ka) had kept the chain to himself and said that there was no chain at all.
Show Achune was a street-gambler in Hongkong, and is now unemployed. He knows nothing of the first and second prisoners; he only knows the third man (Tai-loong-ka), who was occasionally hired by witness's father, who is head-coolie of a barracoon.
On the 26th January, about nine o'clock, witness was at this barracoon in Macao, when third prisoner came to him and said that he had made several tens of dollars at Hongkong and had lost it by gambling.
Witness replied, "You can't make any money here; you had better go back to Hongkong. I am going to Hongkong to-morrow." To which third prisoner said, "If you hear of any reward being offered for me, you come and tell me, and I will go away to some other place."
Witness asked how he had made the money, to which third prisoner replied that he and the other men had robbed a foreigner on the Hill: he had thrown a stone at the foreigner, which was evaded by the foreigner; and then picked up another stone and throwing it at the foreigner wounded him at the head. One of the others then snatched the foreigner's watch; when the foreigner seized one of the other men, and held him so hard that he was nearly dead. Seeing this, third prisoner, seized hold of a mat packer's iron, and beat the foreigner until he could not speak. They then took the watch, but did not search the foreigner's person, as he was afraid.
Witness then told 3d prisoner that he was going to Hongkong next day, and would see what was done in the matter of a reward. Coming down from Macao per steamer on 27th January, he went to Mr Caldwell's informer after supper to pay him a visit.
Mr May here asked where this informer lived?
Mr Hazeland said that he objected to the house being given; the name (mention of which he had previously objected to) might as well be given.
Mr May asked if it was not a farce to suppose that this man, whom all connected with the case must be acquainted with, should be imperilled in any way by appearing in the case! It was absurd to suppose so.
Mr Hazeland replied that he never had said anything about that; he objected to the name or the house of the informer being given at this stage, as it might have a prejudicial effect upon the case.
Mr May said he would do what he considered was essential to get at the truth of the matter; and he would send a subpoena for this man this very night, so that he might obtain his evidence.
Mr Hazeland remarked that he was unable to prevent his Worship from doing anything he thought fit regarding the matter; but he certainly would not remain in the conduct of the case, if this informer was brought into Court at present.
Mr May answered that if Mr H., who conducted the case for the prosecution, put the matter in so strong a light as prejudicial to the interests of justice, he would withhold the steps he would otherwise have taken. But were he conducting the prosecution, he would most certainly have brought this informer into Court.
Mr Hazeland: Most certainly I do.
Mr May: Then it is essential that this man should be here.
Mr Hazeland submitted that the informer, even if placed in the box, could not do more than answer one or two questions, and further, that the prosecution—meaning his Worship, the speaker, or anyone else—had no power to bring or call one witness to impeach the credit of a previous witness. He could produce the Ordinance which clearly laid that down.
The evidence was then continued; and the witness narrated what was between him and Mr Caldwell. Third prisoner was arrested on the waterside (Inner Harbor) of Macao. He saw the first prisoner arrested here in Hongkong.
Prisoners asked several questions; but throughout, no one question was put to any of the witnesses which would throw the slightest light upon what line of defence was meant to be followed by the prisoners.
After some further remarks regarding the advisability of producing the informant, the case was adjourned to Tuesday next, at 2 p.m.
Page 49
3
80.
Miscellan
Office!
C
Ai
De Suity to approved by the icting Celui Magiškuk
(
The vreme Mr May whove services in Euiging baldicilio mutprachico
outerning of Mihiefous
ClickR
acknowledged in the
in the Dusjakher expered
to in the above paragraphe of the Houseriál)
vide not, they feel cepured exccipe your Lordssige
animadvewOnI
They respectfully ash
you
Sordshi
to doid that their prevent communication
| anay
be added to stuex Memorial, and convidind
cv pupplemankul” shoute"
I have the honor kebe
My Lend
Your most berduet Fervant
Erwin Pears.
General Secretary
Annex above referred to
THE HOLWORTHY MURDER. The three Chinese (Cheong Alum, Wong Akee and Lo Achoy) now in custody on a charge of having been concerned in the murder of Mr W. W. Holworthy, at the Victoria Gap, were brought up on remand Mr Hazeland, Crown on the 10th. Solicitor, appeared for the prosecution; and Mr D. R. Caldwell watched the case on the surne behalf.
Loo Tuck Yau was the first prisoner called and having been cautioned, he Atated that he was formerly a gambling- man, but now was out of employment.
- Mr Hazeland remarked that the evidence to be produced to-day would be chiedy of conversations hart with the prisoners.
Wituees continued. He has knowledge of the prisoners; having met the first and second, on the 25th January, near the Monument at Wanchi, under the trees. The second prisoner he has known as a gambler for some time, for several years; he knew him als as a thief, who made money by roth ry, umbrella-snatching, Ae, and then came to gauble with the
proceeds. The third prisoner he knows by having seen him at the gambling-places : he was known as the "great blackguard. About noon on the 25th ultimo, he saw the two prisoners (1st and 2d) near the Wan- chai Market; they were quarrelling: he (witness) had a friend with bim, named Wong Achun.
Mr Hazeland objected that minute questions irrelevant to the case should not be put by the Magistrate, as they would never appear as evidence before the Supreme Court: it was mere waste of time.
Mr May remarked that it might appear a waste of time, but in a case so importaut he intended to test the statements made by those witnesses in every possible way. The Crown Solicitor said that the ques- tions put were all for the defence; ~and it certainly was not for the Magistrate specially to look after the prisoners' de- fence. As for the prosecution, that was represented.
Mr May again stated that the prisoners were not defended, and that if Mr Hazo- land, as representing the Crown, put all the questions for the prosecution, he would
3
take care to do so for the case, nut for the į defence. This had been the course he had pursued in many hundreds of similar cases; and he was sure that the Attorney General would be very glad of, all the information relative to the statements of the witnesses, The evidence was then continued. Wit- ness asked the prisoners what the quarrel was about, when the second prisoner told him we three men made a watch yester- day, and are going to divide the money to-day"-mexoing that they had stolen one. They also had a bank note and bro-poma? ken silver about them. Second prisoner | said that a dollar was the cause of the dis- pute second prisoner wished a dollar and live mace more than his share, and first pri- Witness soner would not let him have it. then asked for two or three dollars to drink tea," on the score that the prisoners had been making a fortune; upon which first prisoner began to use abusive language and said, "I have risked my life to get the money; why should I give it to you?" The second prisoner said that the third inan bad got one-half and they (1st and 2d)! had got the other half, and that the quar- el rose over the $1, 5 mace, on their divi- sion, First prisoner, in reply to witness's request for tea-money, said "It is all very well for you asking money; the second pri- soner was seized by the foreigner, and his life was as cold as water (noaning that be was in great danger), when Tai-loong-ka (3d prisoner) saved him." Further second prisoner said that the watch-robbery could not have been done in the street, but that it was fortunately on the Hill Witness
then got the dollar i mace about which the dispute bad arisen, Second prisoner further told witness the Tai-loong-kao had got; half of the money, together with the chain (which he had not divided); and then ad- vised witness to go to him for some money. Witness then went away. On seeing next day the notices offering a $500 reward, he went to Mr Caldwell.
The witness then narrated the various steps taken towards the arrest of the pri soners-two in Hongkong, and the third in Macao.
Wong Achun, the companion of the pre- vious witness, narrated the circumstances and conversation in almost exactly the same tenor and even detail as the first wif- uess. The only disparity appeared to be, that this witness put it that the Macao man (nick-named Tai-loong-ka) had kept the chain to himself and said that there was no chain at all.
Show Achune was a street-gambler in Hongkong, and is now nuemployed. He knows nothing of the first and second pri- soners; be only knows the third man (Tai- loong-ka), who was occasionally hired hy witness's father, who is head-coolie of a bar- raevon. On the 26th January, about nine o'clock, witness was at this barracoon in Macao, when third prisoner came to him aud said that he had made several tens of dollars at Hongkong and had lost it by Witness replied, "You can't gambling. make any money here; you had better go back to Hongkong. I am going to Hong kong to-morrow. To which third prisoner said, "If you hear of any reward being offered for me, you come and tell me, and Wit- I will go away to some other place," nest asked how he had made the money to which third prisoner replied that he and the other men bad robbed a foreigner on the Hill: he bad thrown a stone at the foreigner, which was evaded
:1:
by the foreigner; and then picked up an- other stone and throwing it at the foreigner wounded him at the head. One of the others then anatched the foreigner's watch; when the foreigner seized one of the other men, and held him so hard that he was nearly dead. Seeing this, third prisoner, seized hold of a nat packer's iron, and beat the foreigner until he could not speak. They then took the watch, but did notį search the foreigner's person, as he was afraid.
Witness then told 34 prisoner that he was going to Hongkong next day, and would see what was done in the matter of a reward. Cowing down from Macao per steamer on 27th January, he went to Mr Caldwell's informer after supper to pay him a visit.
Mr May here asked where this informer lived?
Mr Hazeland said that he objected to the house being given; the uame (mention of which he had previously objected to) might as well be given.
Mr May asked if it was not a farce to suppose that this man, whom all connected with the case must be acquainted with, should be imperilled in any way by appear- ing in the case ! It was absurd to suppose
80.
Mr Hazeland replied that he never had said anything about that; he objected to the uame or the house of the informer i being given at this stage, as it might have a prejudicial effect upon the case.
Mr May said he would do what he con. sidered was essential to get at the truth of the matter; and he would send a subpoena for this man this very night, so that he
night obtain his evidence
Mr Hazeland remarked that he was unable to prevent bis Worship from doing anything he bought fit regarding the matter; but he certainly would not re- wain in the conduct of the case, if this in- former was brought inte Court at present
Mr May answered that if Mr II, who coudveted the case for the prosecution. put the mattor in se strong fight ar pro judicial to the interests of justice, he would withhold the steps he would otherwise have taken. But were be conducting the proscentim, he would most certainly have brought this informner in Court. Dil Mr H. wish to test the truth of the witnesses ?
Mr Hageland: Most certainly I do. Mr May: Then it is essential that this ipan should be here,
Mr Mazeland ambmitted that the in- former, even if placed in the box, could no do more than answer one or two ques- tions, and further, that the prosecution.--- meaning his Worship, the speaker, or any one else had no power to bring or call one witness to impeach the credit of a previous witness. He could produce the Ordinance which clearly laid that down.
The evidence was then continued'; and the witness narrated what was he be- tween him and Mr Caldwell. Thir pri soner was arrested on the waterside dinner Harbor) of Macao. He saw the first pri- soner arrested bere in Hongkong,
Prisoners asked several questions ; but throughout, no one question was put to any of the witnesses which would throw the slightest light upon what line of defence was meant to be followed by the prisoners. After some farther remarks regarding the advisability of producing the informant, the case was adjourned to Tuesday next, at 2 p.m.
49
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.