CO129-157 - Sir MacDonnell Acting Governor Sir Kennedy - 1872 [4-5] — Page 428

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

426

Lord Campbell's Act, the first section of which repeals part of the proviso in Lord Denman's Act (6 and 7 Vict. c 85.).

I hope it is not necessary for me to state that the Ordinance to which I have referred was not in my mind when the present provisions of the Bill were under discussion in Council, as of course, however much I might have disapproved of its enactments, it would have been my bounden duty to have called the attention of His Excellency the late Governor to the fact of the existence of the clause and the omission to deal with it. In reality the clause in question only occurred to me when casually reading in the Times newspaper of 29th January of the present year the case of R v Queen N. Payne which was argued before all the judges in England. The point for decision was whether where two or more prisoners were charged in the same indictment, one prisoner could be examined for or against a fellow prisoner. The unanimous decision of the judges was that he could not.

Finding this to be so, I examined the matter and the former decisions upon the subject.

Edit History

2026-05-20 17:12:31 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

7. 426 Lord Campbell's Act, the first section of which repeals part of the proviso in Lord Denman's Act (6 and 7 Vict. c 85.). I hope it is not necessary for me to state that the Ordinance to which I have referred was not in my mind when the present provisions of the Bill were under discussion in Council, as of course, however much I might have disapproved of its enactments, it would have been my bounden duty to have called the attention of His Excellency the late Governor to the fact of the existence of the clause and the omission to deal with it. In reality the clause in question only occurred to me when casually reading in the Times newspaper of 29th January of the present year the case of R v Queen N. Payne which was argued before all the judges in England. The point for decision was whether where two or more prisoners were charged in the same indictment, one prisoner could be examined for or against a fellow prisoner. The unanimous decision of the judges was that he could not. Finding this to be so, I examined the matter and the former decisions upon the subject.

Baseline (Original)

یا 7. 426 Lord Campbellitet, the first secocion of which repeals part of the proviso in Lord Dinman's Act (6 and 7 Nick: € 85.)- me I hope it is not necpary for to state think the Ordinance to which I have referred referred was not mink when the present to my provisions of the Dill were under discusion in Conncil, as of Course, however much I might have disapproved of its enactments, it would have been bounden my duty to have called the attention of His Excellency the late Governor to the fact of the existence of the clause and the omission to deal >> with it. In reality the clause in question only occurred to me when casually reading in the Times neurpaper of 29th January of the present year the ease of Ru Qucen the N. Payne which was argued before all the niges in Supland._ the point for decision was whether where his or Avere wol Prisoners charged in the same inslictiune, one prisonur Could for be examined. or against a fellow prisoner._ the mixnimous decision of the Judges was that he could not. Finding this to be 20, examined the matter and the former accisions upon the subject

2026-05-20 17:12:31 · Baseline

View content

یا

426

Lord Campbellitet, the first secocion

of which repeals part of the proviso in Lord Dinman's Act (6 and 7

Nick: € 85.)-

I hope it is not necpary for

to state think the Ordinance

to which I have referred

referred was not

mink when the

present to my provisions of the Dill were under discusion in Conncil, as of Course, however much I might have disapproved of its enactments, it would have been

bounden my

duty to have called the attention of His Excellency the late Governor to the fact of the existence of the clause and the omission to deal

with it. In reality the clause in

question only occurred to me when

casually reading in the Times neurpaper of 29th January of the present year the ease of Ru Qucen

the

Payne which was argued before all the niges in Supland._

the point for decision was

whether where his or

Avere

wol

Prisoners

charged in the same inslictiune,

one prisonur Could

for

be examined.

or against a fellow prisoner._ the mixnimous decision of the

Judges

was that he could not.

Finding this to be 20,

examined the matter and the

former accisions upon

the subject

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.