Page 361
A linger tell
CINEL ANJ 21 20,900910 sami zr A
190W 120* Canedo 90 Div0l2 (rasa96-CAO "TUJJA
AGEN FUNC) (ilsujos Lue Je Jungen de 2012* *382
* Jeatrar myndava sul
-ISADIL) de af hot 'eratub mad
a tempat ne 10 Letra eLTOJIA &
Sra ***Wi J HOBSWAN) SA! AT BLet JaspAJMIZ AJ
„a roda jo,anceneg 19IJO LJ6 78djono
SAUNYOON Je juret de bVONAJASE LOr Lejorvald
A JASNJO 1198010 290JIA 9301009
wal Leet (193*nu)*3iau 21 20 12 2333 Jug
U s
.400
A ARAD BAUTA BERJI AA
મારા
:{
Je* les 1J 1 * AJIM
.THLY
O LIVE A10 147 90 53 21992 avcae eji
male wa daw12 kunde stasyQE JI LAK
anondo snel demlege
*
to notaigu Sad A.
FORADIVO kal
e) si 101 Losve.
.0 bar .1
Tad sealt jenius 9240 anonja e gojuji15000,187617
: PN QANI,mowie saut auta 1911990) 701-
SunLive 9301 21 998dJ Jedd sekta.100 SI LAR,18el wel azal
20# 9*{00 to Jedd add yo#^iumauc i 9995 to 343 1101qva
JORI SAJ *70190
Captain was present, so this evidence seems weak.
Page 18:
Another witness, since dead, mentions meeting B. with others of the gang just before the murder was committed.
Page 10: The brother of the man executed at Canton for having dealings with the Hongkong Police stated he met B. at Canton in company with others of the gang, a few days before the murder. Presumably the murder was then arranged, but evidence of what actually passed was not given, probably as it would not have been evidence against the accused.
Page 12:
In Sir Henry Blake's Despatch of June 20th., 1808, to the Colonial Office he refers (paragraph 7) to statements made by witnesses in 1901, and the Attorney-General's opinion also refers to statements made otherwise than at the trial but copies of these do not appear to have been communicated to the Legation. Possibly they contained evidence against B. and others that could not, for technical reasons, be produced at the trial of Li Kwai ran. The Attorney-General's opinion also refers to a discrepancy in the evidence as to whether B. was in Hong Kong or Canton at the time of the murder. In the Judge's Notes, page 12, the witness Kong Ngau Ying (since dead) says he was at Hong-Kong on January 10th. The other witness Chan Aan (page 10) mentions having seen him at Canton on the 7th. Perhaps the Attorney-General may have been alluding to some other statement by Chan Man, which I have not seen.
The evidence so far is apparently not very strong, but possibly we might ask for the trial of this officer.
It is to be presumed that you will be able to say where he is to be found.
* Bredu det sale! Souly 17
* ** 13 130191 ZEROJI4 A
A BRA VIA
fed A
J2oJ
% 400 MSOL 93 Jun 191941-
** * **
I am disposed to regard the evidence against Li Ka Cheuk, whose name you consider should be withdrawn from the list of persons to be prosecuted, as on the whole stronger than that which I have been able to find against the Captain of the
361
A ligner tell
CINEL ANJ 21 20,900910 sami zr A
190W 120* Canedo 90 Div0l2 (rasa96-CAO "TUJJA
AGEN FUNC) (ilsujos Lue Je Jungen de 2012* *382
* Jeatrar myndava sul
-ISADIL) de af hot 'eratub mad
a tempat ne 10 Letra eLTOJIA &
Sra ***Wi J HOBSWAN) SA! AT BLet JaspAJMIZ AJ
„a roda jo,anceneg 19IJO LJ6 78djono
SAUNYOON Je juret de bVONAJASE LOr Lejorvald
A JASNJO 1198010 290JIA 9301009
wal Leet (193*nu)*3iau 21 20 12 2333 Jug
U s
.400
A ARAD BAUTA BERJI AA
મારા
:{
Je* les 1J 1 * AJIM
.THLY
O LIVE A10 147 90 53 21992 avcae eji
male wa daw12 kunde stasyQE JI LAK
anondo snel demlege
*
to notaigu Sad A.
FORADIVO kal
e) si 101 Losve.
.0 bar .1
Tad sealt jenius 9240 anonja e gojuji15000,187617
: PN QANI,mowie saut auta 1911990) 701-
SunLive 9301 21 998dJ Jedd sekta.100 SI LAR,18el wel azal
20# 9*{00 to Jedd add yo#^iumauc i 9995 to 343 1101qva
JORI SAJ *70190
Captain was present, so this evidence seers weak.
fage 18:
Another witness, since dead, mentions reeting
B. with others of the gang just before the rurder was cowritted.
Page 10: The brother of the man executed at Canton
for having dealings with the hongkong Folice stated he ret 5. at Canton in company with others of the gang, a few days before the murder. Presumably the murder was then arranged, but evidence of whyt actually passed was not given, probably as it would not have been evidence against the accused.
Page 12:
In Sir Henry biake's Despatch of June 20th., 1808, to the Colonial office he refers (paragraph 7) to state- rents made by witnesses in 1901, and the Attorney-General's
opinion iso refers to staterents made otherwise then at the trial but copies of these do not appear to have been communicated to the Legation. Fossibly they contained evidence against E. and others that could not, for technical reasons, ce produced at the trial of Li Kwai ran. The Attorney-General's opinion also refers to a discrepancy in the evidence as to whether E. was in Hong Kong or Canton at the time of the murder. In the Judge's Notes, page 12, the witness kong Ngau Ying (since dead) says he was at hong- Kong on January 10th. The other witness Chan Aan (page 10)men- tions having seen hir at Canton on the 7th. Perhaps the Attorney- General may have been alluding to some other staterent by Chan Man, which I have not seen.
The evidence so far is apparently not very strong, but possibly we might ask for the trial of this officer.
It is to be presumed that you will be able to say where he is to
be found.
* Bredu det sale! Souly 17
* ** 13 130191 ZEROJI4 A
A BRA VIA
fed A
J2oJ
% 400 MSOL 93 Jun 191941-
** * **
1 an disposed to regard the evidence against
L1 Ka Cheuk, whose name you consider should be withdrawn from the list of persons to be prosecuted, as on the whole stronger than that which I have been able to find against the Captain of
the
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.