283
071
the 19th February, 1886, and after several remands, prounding the completion of the enquiry against Cheung a-ti, alias Chung a-ti for murder and to the evidence with reference piracy. The charge against Hongkir alias ... Cheung Yo was proceeded with before the 4th April CN on the 27th April.
After the arrest of the prisoner, two witnesses were called named respectively A-yit and Su et on to give evidence as to an act of piracy committed on the 12th March, 1886. On their evidence, I come to the conclusion that a prima facie case had been made out, though by no means a strong one.
For the defence Chung a-ti, the prisoner in the previous rendition case was called and gave exculpatory evidence. Mr Wotton, the solicitor appearing for the prisoner, raised the following objections on his behalf:
1. That the defendant is not a fugitive criminal under the 21st section of the Treaty of Tientsin, and therefore the Ordinance does not apply.
2. That where such an offence as here alleged to have been committed is brought to the notice of the Government whose duty it is to punish that offence and it is proved that the person charged has been in their territory a sufficient time to enable them to discover and arrest him, if it is their intention.
2.
283
071
the 19th February, 1886, and after
-several romande, poudring
the
completion
of the ecove against Cheung et chi,
alies Chung a-ti for
nouider and
to
the evidence with reference piracy. * the charge against Hongkir alias
...
Cheung Yo was provided with before
4110
CN
the 27th April.
After
the arrest
eviduce
clo
formal et
to
of the prisoner, two wikervees were called named respectively No A-yit and Su at on to give evidence as to an act of piracy committed on the 12th March, 1880. On their evidence. I come to the conclusion that a prima facie
case
had been made out, though by ne
CARACA
a et
strong
orica
For the defence Chung ethe,
the
the prisoner in the previous rendition
evidence of
case was called and gave
exgative teuolewey,
Mr Wotton, the soliciter appearing
for the prisoner, raised the following objections on his behalf :
1. That the defereeteret is nota fugitive
criminal under the 21st section
of the Treaty of Sicutsin, and therefore
the Ordinance does not apply.
9th that where such an
offence
as here
alleged to have how committed is brought to the notice of the Government whose duty it is to punish that -- offerisce and it is proved that the
person charged has been in their territory a sufficient time to ca
enable them to discover and
him, if it
if it is their
arriet him.
intention.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.