CO129-534-9 Law of Piracy- case of Rex v. Chung Tam Kwong 1-4-1931 - 20-4-1932 — Page 71

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

71

:

statute of Henry VIII was at no time enlarged by

the subsequent statutory additions in England to

the list of felonies.

Apart from the distinction drawn in the law

of England between felony and misdemeanour it is also

necessary in interpreting the Aami ralty Offences

(Colonial) Act, 1849, to inquire what meaning has

been given in England both in statutes and in

indictments to the word "piracy".

It has been

agreed that so far as recorded cases have been

investigated in connection with the present matter

no case has been found in which a conviction for

piracy has been entered in circumstances where no

stealing has occurred. The authoritative statement

for the courts of British Colonies is contained in

the judgment of the Privy Council in "The Attorney

General for the Colony of Hong Kong v. Kwok A Sing"

*((supra) at p.199,) from which judgment I quote the

following opinion of the Judicial Committee

"They see no reason to doubt that the charge of

Sir Charles Hedges, Judge of the High Court of

Admiralty, to the grand jury, as reported in the

case of "Rex v. Dawson" (13 State Trials, 454) and

which was made in the presence and with the appro val

of Holt C.J. and several other common law judges,

contains a correct exposition of the law as to what

constitutes piracy jure gentium. He there says

piracy is only a sea term for robbery, piracy being

a robbery within the jurisdiction of the Amiralty...

.If the mariners of any ship shall

violently dispossess the master and afterwards

carry away the ship itself or any of the goods, with

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.