520
( 26 )
He issued sub-licenses, and had got from the Opium Farmer practically a monopoly of the sale of prepared Opium in the colony. The Opium Farmer was not at liberty to grant any licenses for preparing opium, having been deprived of that power, which former Farmers had. He had two establishments for preparing opium, one of which was over at Mongkok, and he was in the habit of receiving there and at his place here opium the property of his licensee, which he prepared for the licensee, charging him $100 a chest in all, $65 being for the fee and the remainder for expenses. At Mongkok Punti workmen were employed, and one method of preparation, and at the establishment on this side Amoy workmen and another method. The licensee if he wanted the opium for one purpose sent it over to Mongkok to be prepared and if for another purpose it was prepared on this side. On the 4th and 5th September he purchased twelve chests of opium and for the removal of these twelve chests to Mongkok the usual permits were obtained in the name of the Opium Farmer, who assumed the responsibility of the opium being accounted for. The learned counsel detailed the process by which permits are obtained and traced the connection by which he intended to show that the permits which would be put in applied to the particular opium seized. The opium was taken down to the cargo boat in chests, put on board before six o'clock and about that time the boat left. On that evening there was a very strong tide running with little or no breeze. The junk could make little or no progress and the opium was transferred to small boats to be taken over to Mongkok. At that place there was a long stretch of shallow water and mud without any proper landing stage, and it had always been the custom to unpack the opium either in the godowns or in the junk, for convenience in carrying it ashore, as they could not carry it in chests, and that was done in this case.
He would call people from the various godowns from which the opium was obtained to prove the marks and numbers of the chests, and the owner of the cargo boat, who would explain how the chests were broken and the opium put into bags on board the junk and passed on to two boats as the more convenient way under the circumstances of the tide and wind of getting it over to Mongkok. He would also call the Opium Farmer, who would state that what was done was with his consent, these people being practically his partners. The covers of the chests, with their marks and numbers, would also be produced. If he succeeded in proving what he had stated, he thought his Worship would have no difficulty in finding the opium was in possession of the prisoners simply as that of their masters, that their masters were properly in possession of that opium, amounting in all to twelve chests, and that it was properly and lawfully on its way to Mongkok.
Inspector Bremner was recalled for cross-examination. He stated the positions of the boats at the time of the seizure, and said that even under the circumstances of the tide on the night in question he would not expect to find boats taking that direction to reach Mongkok.
In reply to question by his Worship the witness said the man in charge of one of the boats told him they were going to Mongkok, but afterwards changed his mind and said he did not know where they were going. The man also said he was unfortunate to get caught, that the seizure was a good chance for witness, but that he was only to have had $10 for his share. There was a pass over the hills from Mongkok.
Lain Chune Sing, of the Yune Tak firm, No. 121, Praya Central, was then called, and gave particulars of the opium in question in accordance with the statement of counsel. He said the opium was sent to Mongkok because the expenses were smaller there and the water was better.
L. G. D'Almada, clerk in the Imports and Exports Office, identified the permits and the applications on which they were issued.
(97)
Koh Ching Seng, the Opium Farmer, also gave evidence as to the Lam Chune Sing being his licensee, and of the custom of sending opium over to witness's factory at Mongkok. He had three factories, one at West Point, one at East Point and one at Mongkok. The reason he had a factory at Mongkok was that the water was better and there was a constant supply. The supply of Pokfulam water was not constant and was often muddy. He explained that he would have to account for the twelve chests of opium in question, as he was only allowed by his contract to boil 3,600 chests a year, and if he was debited with more than that quantity in the books of the Superintendent of Imports and Exports he would have to pay an additional sum for each chest.
At this stage the case was adjourned until Tuesday at 2.30
POLICE COURT.
17th September.
p.m.
LARGE CONFISCATION OF OPIUM AND HEAVY PENALTIES,
The case in which six men were charged with being in possession of 411 lbs. of Malwa opium and 1,382 lbs. of Patna opium in quantities of less than one chest were again before the court on remand. Mr. Francis, Q.C., instructed by Mr. Webber, appeared under instructions from the owner of the opium for the defence.
The case for the prosecution, as appeared at the former hearings, was that the opium was found packed in bags on board two sampans in the harbour at night. The defence was that the opium was being lawfully conveyed to the Opium Farmer's boiling establishment at Mongkok and that the chests had been broken and the contents packed in bags simply for convenience of landing.
A number of witnesses were now called by the defence to trace the opium from the godowns where it had been stored to the sampans, and to identify it as the contents of the chests mentioned in the removal permits. The cargo boatman gave evidence to the effect that he had often previously taken opium on board his boat for Mong-kok and had it packed in bags on the way over.
Mr. Francis then addressed the Court.
He submitted that the opium seized was in the possession of the first, second, and fourth prisoners, the others being simply boat people. The possession by the first, second, and fourth was really possession by the Yuen Tak Hong, to which the opium belonged. The question therefore arose whether the Yuen Tak Hong was lawfully or unlawfully in possession of it, and he submitted the possession was lawful, the master of the hong having received permits in the name of the Opium Farmer from the Imports and Exports Office authorising him to transfer it from the godowns of the importers to the Opium Farmer's place at Mongkok. The master of the Yuen Tak hong was really the licensed retail seller of prepared Opium, under the Opium Farmer, and he was also a large exporter of prepared opium. There seemed to be no provision in the Opium Ordinance for the exportation of prepared Opium at all and no one was supposed to be in the possession of prepared Opium without a document in a particular form from the person from whom he bought it and that it was intended solely for local consumption.
As a matter of fact it was known the Opium Farmer had for many years past largely exported to California and other countries his own prepared Opium. The owner of the Opium in this case was in the habit of
520
( 26 )
He issued sub-licenses, and bad got from the Opium Farmer practically a mono- poly of the sale of prepared Opium in the colony. The Opium Farmer was not at liberty to grant any licenses for preparing opium, having been deprived of that He had two establishments for preparing power, which former Farmers had. opium, one of which was over at Mongkok, and he was in the habit of receiving there and at his place here opium the property of his licensee, which he prepared for the licensee, charging him with his licence fee and expenses. $100 a chest in all, $65 being for the fee and the remainder for expenses. At Mongkok Punti workmen were employed, and one method of preparation, and at the establishment on this side Amoy workmen and another method. The licensee if he wanted the opium for one purpose sent it over to Mongkok to be prepared and if for another purpose it was prepared on this side. On the 4th and 5th September he purchased twelve chests of opium and for the removal of these twelve chests to Mongkok the usual permits were obtained in the name of the Opium Farmer, who assumed the responsibility of the opium being accounted for. The learned counsel detailed the process by which permits are obtained and traced the connection by which he intended to show that the permits which would be put in applied to the parti- cular opium seized. The opium was taken down to the cargo boat in chests, put on board before six o'clock and about that time the boat left. On that evening there was a very strong tide running with little or no breeze. The junk could make little or no progress and the opium was transferred to small boats to be taken over to Mongkok. At that place there was a long stretch of shallow water and mud without any proper landing stage, and it had always been the custom to unpack the opium either in the godowns or in the junk, for convenience in carrying it ashore, as they could not carry it in chests, and that was done in this
case.
He would call people from the various godowns from which the opinto was obtained to prove the marks and numbers of the chests, and the owner of the cargo boat, who would explain how the chests were broken and the opium put into bags on board the junk and passed on to two boats as the more convenient way under the circumstances of the tide and wind of getting it over to Mongkok. He would also call the Opium Farmer, who would state that what was done was with his The covers of the chests, with consent, these people being practically his partners.
their marks and numbers, would also be produced. If be succeeded in proving what he had stated, he thought his Worship would bave no difficulty in finding the opium was in possession of the prisoners simply as that of their masters, that their masters were properly in possession of that opium, amounting in all to twelve chests, and that it was properly and lawfully on its way to Mongkok.
Inspector Bremner was recalled for cross-examination. He stated the positions of the boats at the time of the seizure, and said that even under the circumstances of the tide on the night in question he would not expect to find boats taking that direction to reach Mongkok.
In reply to question by his Worship the witness said the man in charge of one of the boats told him they were going to Mongkok, but afterwards changed his mind and said he did not know where they were going. The man also said he was unfortunate to get caught, that the seizure was a good chance for witness, but that he was only to have had $10 for his share. There was a pass over the hills from Mongkok.
Lain Chune Sing, of the Yune Tak firm, No. 121, Praya Central, was then called, and gave particulars of the opium in question in accordance with the state- ment of counsel. He said the opium was sent to Mongkok because the expenses
were smaller there and the water was better.
L. G. D'Almada, clerk in the Imports and Exports Office, identified the permits and the applications on which they were issued.
(97)
Koh Ching Seng, the Opinn Farmer, also gave evidence as to the Lam Chune Sing being his licensee, and of the custom of sending opian over to witness's factory at Mongkok. He had three factories, one at West Point, one at East Point and one at Mongkok. The reason he had a factory at Mongkok was that the water was better and there was a constant supply. The supply of Pokfulam water was not constant and was often muddy. He explained that he would have to account for the twelve chests of opium in question, as he was only allowed by his contract to boil 3,600 chests a year, and if he was debited with more than that quantity in the books of the Superintendent of Imports and Exports he would have to pay an additional sum for each chest.
At this stage the case was adjourned until Tuesday at 2.30
POLICE COURT.
17th September.
p.m.
LARGE CONFISCATION OF OPIUM AND HEAVY PENALTIES,
The case in which six men were charged with being in possession of 411 lbs. of Malwa opium and 1,382 lbs. of Patna opium in quantities of less than one chest were again before the court on remand. Mr. Francis, Q.C., instructed by Mr. Webber, appeared under instructions from the owner of the opium for the defence.
The case for the prosecution, as appeared at the former hearings, was that the opium was found packed in bags on board two sampans in the barbour at night. The defence was that the opium was being lawfully conveyed to the Opium Farmer's boiling establishment at Mongkok and that the chests had been broken and the contents packed in bags simply for convenience of landing.
A number of witnesses were now called by the defence to trace the opium from the godowns where it had been stored to the sampans, and to identify it as cargo boatman the contents of the chests mentioned in the removal permits. The gave evidence to the effect that he had often previously taken opium on board his boat for Mong-kok and had it packed in bags on the way over.
Mr. Francis then addressed the Court.
He submitted that the opium scized
was in the possession of the first, second, and fourth prisoners, the others being simply boat people. The possession by the first, second, and fourth was really possession by the Yuen Tak Hong, to which the opiam belonged. The question therefore arose whether the Yuen Tak Hong was lawfully or unlawfully in posses- sion of it, and he submitted the possession was lawful, the master of the hong having received permits in the name of the Opium Farmer from the Imports and Exports Office authorising him to transfer it from the godowns of the importers to the Opium Farmer's place at Mongkok. The master of the Yuen Tak hong was really the licensed retail seller of prepared Opium, under the Opium Farmer, and he was also a large exporter of prepared opium. There scomed to be no provision in the Opium Ordinance for the exportation of prepared Opium at all and no one was supposed to be in the possession of prepared Opin without a document in a particular form from the person from whom he bought it and that it was intended It was quite evident that did not provide for all the solely for local consumption.
As a matter of fact it was known the Opium practical necessities of the case. Farmer had for many years past largely exported to California and other countries his own prepared Optum. The owner of the Opium in this case was in the habit of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.