Mr. Robinson-Conventionally, my Lord, that would have been perfectly satisfactory, but practically
His Lordship-Then you do not give the jury any sense for getting rid of a thing they have heard.
Mr. Robinson-I can only speak from my own experience; it is very hard to get rid of what one has heard.
Continuing his speech, counsel said the fokis had to say, "We must corrupt the police," in order to get the hush-money from their employers. The employers were helpless and they said, "All right, we will pay the police." The story was merely a stalking horse behind which the fokis, the servants, under the pretence of bribing the police, put most of the money into their own pockets. In regard to Cheng On's story of his interview with defendant, the jury had heard the statement of Mrs. Burnett. The jury had seen Cheng On and had noticed his demeanour; they knew that Inspector Witchell had faithfully and zealously served in the Police Force for fifteen years, and they had the statement of Mrs. Burnett, who was an honest English woman, that she knew Cheng On, that she saw him on the 11th March, that he did not see the defendant. The jury had to judge between that man, Cheng On, and that woman.
Mr. Francis then addressed the jury and said that while a good character was valuable to a man and he was entitled to the benefit in a doubtful case, no matter how good his character might be or how long continued he may have borne that character, if the witnesses satisfied the jury beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the offence with which he stood charged, that good character could not be taken into consideration. If there was a doubt in any case, a defendant was entitled doubly to the benefit of the doubt if he was a man of good character. The jury would weigh the evidence very carefully and say whether the defendant had accepted hush-money not to report the existence of the gambling house. It was clear that there were three or four gambling houses carrying on an extensive business in the colony quite unchecked by what was considered one of the best police forces in the East, and there must have been a considerable amount of corruption in the Police Force before that state of things could have existed. Counsel submitted that whether the books were ill-kept or not, there was no doubt they were perfectly bona fide. After their seizure by the Captain Superintendent of Police, what was his duty? He suspended officers, banished Chinese detectives, and instituted a general inquiry into the state of the Police Force. There was a special inquiry against Inspector Witchell. The three men were arrested and they were detained to give evidence, but there was absolutely no malice shown against the defendant. Counsel again referred to the fact that the Police Force must have been corrupted or these gambling houses could not have kept open from dawn till midnight.
His Lordship asked Mr. Francis to confine himself to the case of the defendant and to argue that he must have known of the existence of the houses.
Mr. Francis, continuing, said that if a single charge had been brought against a member of the Police Force, the jury would have required the strongest and most unmistakable proof as the thing would have been improbable. Here the jury had had it brought home to them that as regards any member of the Police Force, it was not, to put it mildly, impossible that he may have been cognizant of the existence of the houses, and it might be capable of proof that the defendant was one of the persons who received bribes to shut his eyes to the existence of the houses. Beyond that, counsel did not ask the jury to attach any importance whatever to the facts which had been proved. The defence set up was that Cheong On did not pay bribes to Inspector Witchell, but pocketed them himself. There was not a tittle of evidence to support that suggestion, and it was a pure effect of imagination, and a very poor one, too. Did the jury think that the men keeping the gambling houses did not ascertain whether they were being swindled? The fact that daily balances were struck showed that they looked after their own interests and ascertained where all the money went to. Counsel also referred to the letter which the Captain Superintendent of Police received from someone stating that gambling existed in Kwai Wa Lane and which he mentioned only to Inspector Witchell and Mrs. May, and to the evidence given by Cheng On that the defendant asked who wrote the letter to the Captain Superintendent. Cheng On could not possibly have given that evidence unless the defendant had asked the question. There was absolutely no reason why Cheng On's evidence should be disbelieved. As regards Mrs. Burnett, it was quite possible that her story was true with the exception of the date. Did they think that she could recognize Cheng On after having seen him only once? It was highly improbable. Cheng On had said he had never seen her, but it was possible that Cheng On had seen her but had forgotten her. No evidence had been given that any silk had been forwarded to any friend of the defendant.
Defendant-My Lord, here is a letter showing the receipt of it in South Wales.
His Lordship asked the defendant not to interrupt.
Mr. Francis, continuing, said that if the jury had no reasonable doubt of Cheng On's evidence, he asked them in the interests of justice to find the defendant guilty.
Mr. Robinson said that from the point of view so becomingly and properly uttered by his learned friend, "in the interests of justice," he asked whether there would be any objection to the letter mentioned by defendant being produced.
His Lordship thought that such a course would not be regular.
Mr. Robinson said of course he could not prove the letter else he would have done so, but he could produce the letter and the envelope, with the postmark.
His Lordship said the letter could not be admitted at that stage.
His Lordship commenced summing up at 5.20 and said that as a late hour had been reached and the jury had followed the evidence so carefully, he would be less particular in going into all the evidence that had been given. After explaining the law on the question and detailing various points in the information, his Lordship said the contest took place with reference to the receipt of money by the defendant. If they thought that the money was received under the circumstances referred to, there could be no doubt that the defendant was guilty. His Lordship could not help thinking that the length of the case had been greatly extended by the fact that the defence had taken upon themselves the burden of the police case generally, having an eye, so to speak, to the position of the members of the Police Force. He founded those observations on two reasons. In the first place, Mr. May underwent a very long and severe cross-examination; he was under cross-examination for practically a whole day. The other reason was the introduction of the books and papers. Both those points and the way with which the points were dealt made him think that the defendant had committed an error in judgment as they very much prolonged the case and made it more embarrassing to arrive at a right conclusion. His Lordship's own view in regard to the books was that if the books were ruled not to be corroborative evidence in any way against the defendant, then the result was that the defendant had set up a bogey in order to knock it down, and he had taken a great deal of time to do it, whereas if the jury arrived at the conclusion that the books did corroborate the story, the defence had undoubtedly admitted an enemy in the camp by asking for the books. If the books had not been produced, his Lordship would have asked the jury to dismiss from their minds anything they might have heard or read in the newspapers regarding the entries in the books, and he was quite certain the jury would have acted on those instructions. So also in regard to the general position of the police. There was no need to make out that Captain May had mismanaged the police in regard to the gambling.
Page 476
Mr. Robinson-Conventionally, my Lord, that would have been perfectly satisfactory, bat practically
His Lordship-Then you do not give the jury any sense for getting rid of a thing they have heard.
Mr. Robinson-I cau culy speak that from my own experience it is very hard to get rid of what one has heard.
Continuing his speech, counsel said the fokis had to say, We must corrupt the police," in order to get the hush-money from their em. ployers. The employers were helpless and they said, "All right, we will pay the police." The story was merely a stalking horse "behind which the fokis, the servante, under the pre- tence of bribing the police, put most of the money into their own pockets. In regard to Cheng On's story of his interview with defen- lant the jury had heard the statement of Mra. Bu nott. The jury had seen Cheng On and had noticed his demeanour; they know that Inspector Witchell had faithfully sud zealously served in the Police Force for fifteen years, and they had the statement of Mrs. Burnett, who was an honest English woman, that she knew Cheng On, that she saw him on the 11th March, that be did not see the defendant. The jury had to judge between that man, Cheng On, and that woman.
Mr. Francis then addressed the jury and said that while a good character was valuable to a man and he was entitled to the benefit in a doubtful case, no matter how good his character might be or how long continued he may have borne that character, if the witnessas satisfied the jury beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the offence with which he stood charged, that good character could not be taken into consideration. If there was a doubt in any case a defendant was entitled doubly to the benefit of the doubt if he was a man of good character. The jury would weigh the evidence very carefully and say whether the defendant had accepted hush-money not to report the existence of the gambling house. It was clear that there were three or four gambling houses carrying on an extensive business in the colony quite unchecked by what was considered one of the best police forces in the East, and there must have been a considerable amount of cor- ruption in the Police Force before that state of things could have existed. Counsel submitted that whether the books were ill-kept or not there was no doubt they were perfectly bona fide. After their seizure by tho Captain Superin- tendent of Police what was his duty ? He suspended officers, banished Chinese deteo- tives, and instituted a general inquiry into the state of the Police Force. There was special inquiry against Inspector Witchell. The three men were arrested and they were detained to give evidence, but there was aban lutely no malies shown against the defendant. Counsel again referred to the fact that the Police Force must have been corrupted or these gambling houses could not have kept open from dawn till midnight.
No
His Lordship asked Mr. Francis to confine himself to the case of the defendant and to argue that he must have known of the existence of the houses.
Mr. Francis, continuing, said that if a single charge had been brought against a member of the Police Force the jury would have required the strongest and most unmistakeable proof as the thing would have been improbable. Here the jury had had it brought home to them that as regards any member of the Police Force it was not, to put it mildly, impossible that he may have been cognizant of the existence of the bonses, and it might be capable of proof that the defendont was one of the persons who received bribes to shut bis eyes to the existence of the houses. Beyond that, counsel did not ask the jury to attach any importance whatever to the facts which had been proved. The defence set up was that Cheong On did not pay bribes to Inspector Witchell, but pocketed them himself. There was not a tittle of avidence to support that suggestion, and it was a pure effect of imagination, and a very poor one, too. Did the jury think that the men keeping the gambling houses did not ascertain whether they were
who was the
being swindlod? The fact that daily balances were struck showed that they looked after their own interests and ascertained where all the money went to. Counsel also referred to the latter which the Captain Superintendent of Police received from some one stating that gambling existed in Kwai Wa Lane and which he mentioned only to Inspector Witchell and Mrs. May, and to the evidence given by Cheng On that the defendant asked who wrote the letter to the Captain Superintendent. Cheng On could not possibly have given that evidence unless the defendant had asked the question. There was absolutely no reason why Cheng On's evidence should be disbelieved. As regards Mrs. Burnett, it was quite possible that her story was true with the exception of the date. Did they think that she could recognize Cheng On after having seen him only once? It was highly in- probable, Cheng On had said he had never seen her, but it was possible that Cheng On had seen her but had forgotten her. No evid ence had been given that any silk had been forwarded to any friend of the defendant.
Defendant-My Lord, here is a letter show- ing the receipt of it in South Wales.
His Lordship asked the defendant not to interrupt.
Mr. Francis, continuing, said that if the jury had no reasonable doubt of Cheng On's evid- ence he asked them in the interests of justice to flnd the defendant guilty.
Mr. Robinson said that from the point of view so becomingly and properly uttered by his learned friend, in the interests of justice," he asked whether there would be any objection to the letter mentioned by defendant being produced.
His Lordship thought that such a course would not be regular.
Mr. Robinson said of course he could noti prove the letter olse he would have done so, Lat he could produce the letter and the envelope, with the post mark.
His Lordship said the letter could not be admitted at that stage.
His Lordship commenced summing up at 5.20 and said that as a late hour had been reached and the jury had followed the evidence so care- fully he would be less particular in going into all the evidence that had been given. After explaining the law on the question and detail- ing various points in the information his Lord- ship said the contest took place with reference to the receipt of money by the defendant. If they thought that the money was received under the circumstances referred to there could be no doubt that the defendant was guilty. His Lordship could not help thinking that the length of the case had been greatly extended by the fact that the defence had taken upon themselves the burden of the police case gen- erally, having an eye, so to speak, to the posi- tion of the members of the Folice Force. He founded those observations on two reasons. Iu the first place, Mr. May underwent a very long and severe cross-examination he was under cross-examination for practically a whole day. The other reason was the introduction of the books and papers. Both those points and the way with which the points were dealt made him think that the defendant had committed au error in judgment as they very much pro- lougel the case and made it more embar- rassing to arrivo at a right conclusion. His Lordship's own view in regard to the books was that if the books were ruled not to be cor- roborative evidence in any way against the defendant, then the result was that the defen- dant had set up a bogey in order to knock it down, and he had taken a great deal of time to do it, whereas if the jury arrived at the con elusion that the books did corroborate the story the defeuce had undoubtedly admitted an enemy in the camp by asking for the books. If the books had not been produced his Lordship would have asked the jury to dismiss from their minds anything they might have heard or read in the newspapers regarding the entries in the books, and he was quite certain the jury would have acted on those instructions. So also in re- gard to the geuerlaposition of the police. There was no need to make out that Captain May bad mismanaged the police in regard to the gam
476
$
:
fi
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.