CO129-230 - Public Offices & Others - 1886 — Page 294

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

293

the Gout. The prisoner was first brought before Mr. A. W. Wie on a charge on 2nd February 1886 on a charge of piracy, but was discharged.

On the same day he was charged with piracy & murder within the jurisdiction of the Emperor of China, and after some evidence had been given the case was remanded, and on the 10th of March 1886, reopened before me, when the evidence previously taken was re-heard and the case continued. Little difficulty recurred in obtaining Interpreters for the peculiar dialect spoken by some of the witnesses; three persons being employed; but on the whole and as far as I can judge, though objection was raised to the first interpreter, the interpretation was satisfactory, and not prejudicial to the prisoner's case. The case for the prosecution was that the prisoner was a pirate and murderer, and in support of that case they produced witnesses to prove three

Edit History

2026-05-25 09:59:14 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

293 the Gout. The prisoner was first brought before Mr. A. W. Wie on a charge on 2nd February 1886 on a charge of piracy, but was discharged. On the same day he was charged with piracy & murder within the jurisdiction of the Emperor of China, and after some evidence had been given the case was remanded, and on the 10th of March 1886, reopened before me, when the evidence previously taken was re-heard and the case continued. Little difficulty recurred in obtaining Interpreters for the peculiar dialect spoken by some of the witnesses; three persons being employed; but on the whole and as far as I can judge, though objection was raised to the first interpreter, the interpretation was satisfactory, and not prejudicial to the prisoner's case. The case for the prosecution was that the prisoner was a pirate and murderer, and in support of that case they produced witnesses to prove three

Baseline (Original)

293 the Gout. The prisoner was first brought before Mr. A.4. Wie charge on 2nd February 1886 on a of piracy, but was discharged. On the same day he was charged with piracy & murder within the jurisdiction of the Emperon of China, and after some evidence had been iven the case was given and on remanded, 10th of March 1886, reopened before me, when the eindence previously taken was re-heard and the case continued. Love little difficulty recurred in in obtaining Interpreters the peculiar dialect spoken by some -f the witnesses; Three persons being employed; but on the whole and I can judge, though objection far as some was raised to the first interpreter, the interpretation was satisfactory, and not prejudicial to the prisoner's case. The case for the prosecution was that the prisoner Ch pirate and murderer, and in support of that case they produced witnesses to prove three

2026-05-25 09:59:14 · Baseline

View content

293

the Gout. The prisoner was first brought before Mr. A.4. Wie

charge

on 2nd February 1886 on a of piracy, but was discharged.

On the same day he was charged with piracy & murder within the jurisdiction of the Emperon of China, and after

some evidence had been

iven the case was

given

and on

remanded,

10th of March 1886, reopened before me, when the eindence previously taken was re-heard and the case continued. Love little difficulty recurred

in obtaining Interpreters the peculiar dialect spoken

some

-f

the witnesses;

Three persons being employed;

but on

the whole and

I can judge, though objection

far

some

was raised to the

first interpreter, the interpretation

was satisfactory, and not prejudicial to the prisoner's

case. The case

for the prosecution

was that the prisoner

pirate and murderer, and in

support of that case they produced witnesses to prove

three

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.