CO129-550-7 Rex v. Ng Loi Yuen- appeal to Privy Council 1-1-1934 - 31-12-1934 — Page 29

-17-

29

The

As to the second question of law. The judge should have discharged the Jury when Mary Pine was not produced. authority on that is Windsor and the Queen 1866. Law Reports 1 B. p. 289 D.326.

R. V. Lewis, 2 I. Lopes Courts p. 182 - page 181,

r

-

It seems then that the Court has no power to interfere with the discretion of the judge if that power is properly exercised.

Archbold 28th edition page 231,

Races 15th ed. page 304 to 308 page 305. under heading" Absent witness.

It Was upon defence to ask for the postponement of the trial. p.257. I submit it as a proposition that if a certain witness for the Crown were absent which the defence wished to cross-examine and the defence applied to the burt to postpone the trial for that purpose, it is xx quite open to the defence to make that application,

Mr. Hayden i» It was not open to you to make the application for the postponement ?

Mr. Fregeri- No, it was not for me to make the application. It was for the defence and I don't think as far as I know, they made that application.

Halsbury Hailsham edition at page 276. Vol. 9. And of para 4021

Then with regard to the new question on law which my friend raises in his additional grounds for appeal the admissibility of Mrs. Fairburn's evidence.

**

Mr. Jack 81- we should like you to deal with that fully. Arreseri- Very well, I will, My Lord.

Adjourned to Thursday 11.10. 34 -

- at 10 a.m.