August 15, 1895.7
we
Opium, and it seems to me, with all respect to the Magistrate's decision, that that was evidence of continuous usage.
The Chief Jutico-Was there any evidenca that such was the fact within the captain's knowledge ?
CHÍNA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
higher dividend on the present
occa- found on board this vessel. The vessel had been | sion, but that opinion is not founded previously used for the purposes of conveying. on the reasons advanced by Mr. SHEWAN. The Chairman said:" If silver were only steady at a reasonably high level, would not have any difficulty in pleasing our shareholders in the matter "of dividend, but in its present very uncer "tain position we have got to think seriously "before committing ourselves to abigh "sterling dividend." The Bank is having a splendid run of prosperity at present, but the shareholders will exercise a wise discre- tion in not being too exacting in the matter of dividends for some little time to come.
SUPREME COURT.:
12th August.
IN APPELLATE JURISDICTION. BEFORE THE FULL COURT-Sir FIELDING CLARKE (CHIEF JUSTICE) AND ME. A G. WISE (ACTING PUISNE JUDGE.)
Mr. Francis-There was no direct evidence except it was sworn that the captain was in charge of the v ssel.
"
117
79
Mr. Francis-Pardon me for interrupting, my Lord. It is not the duty of Castoms officers at Canton to prevent opin going on board.
satisfied upon the evidencs before him that every reasonable precaution " had been taken to pro- rent the importation of opium. Now what was done was this. A notics of a very direct char- acter was put ap all over the ship for the in- formation of the passengers that they would get into serious trouble if the attempted to import opium into the colony; they were personally warned by word of mouth that they should not do so. The question is whether that is sufficient -whether that is "every reasonable precaution Continuing, Mr. Francis pointed out that it within the maning of the Act. Well now, în was also given in evidence that the luggage of considering that expression, "every reasonable the passengers, when the vessel left a Chinese precaution, we must consider the character of port, was inspected by Chinese Customs officers, the people who have to take the precautions. One precaution he suggested was that the owners They are not policemen, and they are not Customs of the ship could vary easily and without officers; they are officers of the ship, and of any trouble or expense direct one of their course their duty-their primary duty-is to look officers to accompany the Customs offior in after the safe navigation of the ship. It is sug- hie search through the luggage, and as-gested that they might have done various things. certain whether any of the passengers It appears to be the duty of the Customs officers had such a considerable quantity of opiam to inspect the luggage before it is put on board. as had been fouad in this case. A passenger The officers of the ship cannot reasonably be was perfectly entitled to bring on board a suffi supposed to see that that duty is efficiently per. cient quantity of opium for his own use during formed. It is suggested that a ship's officer the voyage, and the officers at Canton would not should accompany the Custo ns- ba entitled to interfere with such passenger. For a ship's officer to go round with a Customs' official would be doing no violence to the pas- sengers; and when a ship was constantly travel- ling backwards and forwards to Chinese ports somebody was bound to do something more than post a notice in each cabin, It was in the power of the owners to stipulate before they allowed any passenger on bard that he shall have his luggage searched; if necessary such stipulation should be printed on the back of the tickets. He submitted that it was not a reasonable precau- Mr, Francis, QC. (instructed by Mr. H. Ltion to stick up a notice requiring the passengers Dennys), appeared for the appellant, and Mr. to throw the opium overboard before the ship McNeill (instructed by Mr. Ellis, of Mr. V. H. enters Hongkong; a ship's officer should go round Deacon's office) for the respondent.
and see that the opium was thrown overboard. This was a very important question for the opium farmer. It was only the second case that had been taken under the section (which had been taken from the Singapore Ordinance), anl this was the first case in which the question of what is rewouable precau- tion had been raised. The officers did nothing to see that their ship was not used for the illegal conveyance of prepared opium The notice was not put up by the owners but by their compradore, and from the concluding section one would imagine that it was put up by the passengers the nselves. It rau as follows "As meu of this steamor wo have spared no pains-"
LAM SAU YAU, APPELLANT, V. CAPTAIN. LUNT, RESPONDENT.
At the Magistracy a charge brought by an excisoman of the Opium Farmer against Cap- tain Lunt, of the steiner Fushun of allowing his vessel to be used for the importation of opium contrary to the provisions of the Prepared Opium Ordinance was dismissed. Against that decision the complainant appealed.
Mr. Francis said this was an appeal from the Police Magistrate, Hon. E. Wodehouse, on a ques- tion of fact. A charge, was brought by the appel. lant against Captain Lunt, of the Fushun, under the provisions of section 33 of Ordinance 21 of 1891, which is the Prepared Opium Ordinance at present in force. The section was as follows:- If any ship shall be used for the importa tion, landling,, removal, carriage. or
cou veyance of any opium in contravention of this Ordinance, the masters. owner, or agents thereof shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding one thousand dollars. An amount of any such opium found on board any such ship and exceed ing (a) in the case of any steamship of 60 tous burden and upwards Tls. 50 in weight, (b) in the case of any steamship under 60 tons burden Tls. 25 in weight, (e) in the case of all other ships Tls. 10 in weight, shall be deemed evidence of the unlawful use of any such ship, unless it be proved to the sati-faction of the Magistrate that every reasonable precaution had been taken to prevent the unlawful use of any such ship.
and that none of the officers or their servants or
..
The Chief Justice-The compradore cannot men of the steamer;" he can b. a man
be the only.
Mr. Francis-Quite so, my Lord.g The Chief Justice-It does not matter. By permission and arrangement of the steamship company this notice is brought to the knowledge
of every passenger.
that a ship's officer should assist in the search Mr. Fraucis, in conclusion, again suggested
of the luggage,
The Chief Justice-Is there a Customs officer on board the ship?
Mr. Francis No; the Customs officer is on board the ship at Canton to see that all duties tó the Canton Customs are properly paid. It is not his duty to prevent the opium going on board.
*
The Chief Justice-I took it down as your argument that it was his duty to inspect the luggage. It is suggested that an officer of the ship should accompany the Customs officer in the search. I think that would by altogether unreasonable. Unless som duty was imposed upon the captain by the Legislature it would be areas uable to suppose that the time of the ship's officers should be taken up in that duty on board any steamer. It is said that the ship's com pany should insist on the inspection of the Ing. gage. There again it would be rather a trouble- some business, and I do not think it would be rea- sonable for them to take that trouble unless there was an expressed duty. The same remark applies to the suggestion that they might personally see during the voyage that all the luggage was opened and inspected to ascertain if there was any opium on board. It seems to me that they could not be reasonably expected to do these things, and I rally do not know mysɔlf what else they could have doan. It has not been sug- gested that they could reasonably be expected to have done more than taking the precautions they did. Under these circumstances I think the appeal must be dismissed. Verdict for respondent with costs.
The Acting Puisne Judge.—I couður,
THE KUCHENG MASSACRE.
STATEMENTS OF THE SURVIVORS.
FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT.]
FOOCHOW, 5th August, 1895. I enclose a copy of the statements of the survivors, which will give you about all that is known of this sad affair. I can only add the story of what happened to the Stewart family as well as can be gathered from the talk of the elder of the children..
The 1st August was the birthday of one of the children, I do not remember which, and three of them went out, before their parents had risan, to the hills to gather flowers. They heard a sound of drums and gongs, and, think. ing it was some kind of military parade, rau to see the sight. As they camo near enough
any of the crew of such ship were implicated therein." Under another provision it was forbidden to bring prepared opium into the colony or into the waters of the colony. The The Chief Justice-I do not think we need charge made against Captain Laut was that his trouble you. Mr. McNeill. The offence charged ship had been used for the convoyance into the against the respondeut in this case was the un- colony of a quantity of opium of upwards of lawful use of his vessel for the importation of Tis, 50 in weight, his vessel being one of over opium. There was, in the ordinary meaning of 60 tons burden; and under the provisions of the the expression, no use of the vessel for the im- Ordinance the mere fact that the opinm was portation of opium. The opium which was found found was evidence of the unlawful use of such concealed in the passengers' luggage was being ship The burden appeared to be thrown on conveyed in the ship, but that would not amount the captain of the ship to show that he took all to the use of the ship for the importation of reasonable precautions to prevent the vessel opium in what I consider the correct meaning of being so used. There was no evidence that the the term. Bat the Orlinance goes on to say master, owners, or any of the crew were directly that if "in the case of a steamship of 60 tons implicated in the transaction, and therefore burden and upwards"which the steamship in counsel confined himself to the question of iu-question was-"Tls. 50 in weight was found ". sufficient precautious. Ho proceedel to read and more than that quantity was found that to distinguish the voices, they heard talk of the depositions taken before the Magistrate, these facts shall be deemed evidence of the un-killing the foreigners, which frightened them showing that on the 30th May Tls. 74 of pre-lawful use of the ship, unless it be proved to the and they started to run to the house. They satisfaction of the Magistrate that every reason. were met at the door by their father, who had pared oplum were found on the ship.
As soon as he saw The Chief Justice-We have real the deposi.able precaution had been taken to prevent the been aroused by the noise. tions, and understand the point on which you unlawful use of any such ship, and that none of something was wrong he rushed to his room, are grounding your objection. It appears that the officers or their servants or the crew were im- probably to get his wife, and this is the last that a notice was put up in the c bins, and I think plicated therein." So it was a question whether was ever seen of him. The children ran to the the passengers were personally warned, and you by force of the legal fiction established by this nurse, and actually saw her killed by the rioters suggest that that is insufficient..
Ordinance the Magistrate was bound to say that while trying to protect the baby. The oldest. Mr. Francis-Yes. I would call your Lord the ship was used for the unlawful importation girl dragged the b.by from under her dead body ship's attention to the fact that Tls. 74 of opium of opium. Well on this appeal it isnot suggested and succes led, together with the other childreu, were found on board. Another point, which the that any of the offers or their servants or the in getting ont of the house, but not until they Magistrate did not consider admissible as creg were implicated in the conveyance of were all more or less knocked about. evidence, was that there had been a considerable opium. The contention is that it was not shown number of other cases in which opium had been that the Magistrate ought to have
The foreigners resident at Hwasang were theo been 'Rev. R. W. and Mrs. Stewart, an Irish nurse
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.