"In connection on his behalf but under this Ordinance he will have a right to have his counsel's carefully prepared statements put forward for him by the judge (though subject to comment but only as evidence is treated) as evidence.
A Judge without the guidance of counsel on one side and the other, and without the aid of the action of counsel, will, in Hong Kong, have to act on the facts, "not" by the flexible rules of law governed by him, and the comparatively easy common law numerous decisions of English judges guided him. Under the Ordinance he is deprived of these aids and there will be as various kinds and degrees of the "interrogation" of prisoners in Hong Kong as there are degrees of disposition to condemn prisoners in the minds of Judges.
I fear that I may have been too long in obeying Lord Kimberley's request. I could offer other arguments, but I feel already too lengthy. I am alarmed at the duty which Ordinance No 3 of 1872 will impose on me - a duty which will embarrass me.
If it be thought that Ordinance No 3 is moving in the right direction, I think that the provisions proposed by Mr Ball should be added as a protection to the accused. I see most reasonable other suggested alterations.
It is a small matter, but I note that the word "prisoner" is used throughout. The question arises: is the Ordinance intended to apply to prisoners only, and not to be extended to all accused persons on their trials, such as persons on bail usually designated Defendants, or to Defendants under Summonses?
I return Ordinance No 3, 1872, as requested. I also enclose Rules of Courts in China & Japan, Code of Criminal Procedures (India), and Two MS Books (Calendars of Trials in the Superior Court of Hong Kong).
The four last enclosures - being frequently referred to - their return when done with would oblige.
I very much regret that my answer has been very long delayed. This is owing partly to absence from London, but mainly to my not having been able to find the documents I enclose until within this last week.
I have the honor to be,
Sir,
Your very obedient Servant,
John Smale,
Chief Justice of Hong Kong.
Lar
کو
" in cordene on his behalf but under this
ait the will have
a
right to have his
cunningly dearsed statements for put forward for him by the judge (though subject to comment but only evidence is treated) us evidence.
a Judge
Washout the Ardmance
on
a
as other
the
action
hial in Hong long une factic "
"not" the flexible rules of law governed him & the
comparatively easy the common lair numerous decisions
English judges guided. him - Under the Ordinance he is deprived these aids and there will be as various
kends and degrees of the "interrogation" of prisoners in Hong Kong as
as there
are de
degrees
of disposition to condemn prisoners in the minds of Judges.
Sear. argumentative
that Imay have been tor
obeying Lord Kumbarley's arguments but
Czv
request. Scould offer other
these
are
I feel abreaty too long
Jans alarmed at the
вид
duty
which
Ordinance No 3 of 1872 will impose on
duty which will
me - a
embarrass me..
No 3 is m
very
much
If it be thought that Ordinance the right direction I think that the provies proposed by Mo Ball sobe
protection to the accused
added is as a
Isee
most reasonable other suggested alterations
1월
objection this
لاگ
the Ordmane
495
It is a small matter but Inote that the word "pusoner " is used throughout.
The question arises is the Ordinance intended to apply; to prisoners only and not tobe extended to all
on their strials, accused persons a such
?
as persons on bail usually designated Defendants or to Defendants under Summonses Inclosed Ireturn Ordmane No 3 1872 as requested.
Jalso
Salve enclose
Kules
39
of Courts in China & Japan
Code of Criminal Procedures.
(India)
Two Mi S: Books ( Calendars of Trials in the Superior Court of cong dong t
The four last enclosures-being frequently referred to
their rehörn.
when done with would
the
oblige
I very much regret that my answer has Ivery been long delayed. This is owing partly to absence from London but mainly to my not having been able to find the documents, I enclose, until within this last weekly have the honor to be
Sir
Your very obedient Servant
John Smale
Chief Justice of Hong Kong,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.