Page
372
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
is two years' imprisonment with or without hard labour.
With regard to the second defence, contribu- tory negligence and want of direction. In a Criminal Court contibutory negligence cannot be held to be a complete defence. The offence charged is a personal one and the expiation must be personal.
Want of direction is abundantly proved and the lack of system clearly shown. The state- ments made by the Post-Master General and Chief Clerk conflict in very essential points as to who open mail bags, and the course adopted with returned letters, whether they were sent out again, how long they were advertised for, and where they were advertised. The Chief Clerk, however, gave the most reliable evidence on these points. He stated that all or any of 12 or 14 clerks opened mail bags; the letters were never sent out more than once and wore then advertised in the Government Gazette for two months prior to being returned to the country of origin, no Chinese letters ever being adver- tised in a Chinese paper.
The Post-Master General frankly admitted his innocence of most of the internal economy of the Post Office, stating that when he wanted information" himself he "always went to Mr. | Solly"
It was found impossible to make researches by dates, as no records were kept, not even an attendance book. A mail book was produced from which the Chief Clerk stated he could say by the handwriting what officers had made en- tries; and also a Postman's Book, intelligibel only to the same witness.
The Court was utterly unable to ascertain definitely what were the defendant's general duties, the Chief Clerk defining them as, "to take charge of all Chinese correspondence and to arrange for its distribution;" he had three postmen to assist him in sorting the Chinese letters in the Post Office and in handing them over to the others; those four men arrange their hours among themselves" during the hours the Post Office is open, viz., from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. "as a rule one of the Chinese assistants is in the office, but it is not imperative unless there is correspondence; it is not necessary that defen- dant should be conversant with the different districts," it transpiring later that the postmen
sorted their own letters.
Defendant takes charge of the Chinese registered letters, and sorts letters when there is a beavy mail, putting them into the Chinese boxes. Defendant does nothing else in par- ticular. Defendant sometimes goes out with a delivery but he would only deliver in the Western Districts if at all.
An unsigned, undated Book of Instructions to Postmen was produced, Rule 14 of which absolutely prohibits postmen taking letters to their quarters. Rule 28 requires all unstamped letters to be delivered to the Officer in Charge, and the Chief Clerk stated:-" Defendant should have delivered D to him at once for that reason if for no other."
The same witness, the Chief Clerk, stated :- "There is nothing in the instructions marked I. to show what postmen are to do with un- delivered letters.”
•S
A postman called for the defence states: He had never seen the Book of Instructions, he had heard of it. Had never heard of Rule 14 pro- hibiting postmen to take-letters to their rooms, adding that they did do it." This witness stated definitely "that he received D from de- fendant on the 13th of 14th June" afterwards modifying it to "some day in May;" he was a messenger at the time temporarily on duty, had never been on duty in that district before, he went down Gutzlaff Street (the direction on the envelope) and tried to find the "Kwong I Kwok" (a seaman's boarding house at 82, Stanley Street), he did not ask anybody; returning he delivered D to the defendant "Down below in our quar- -ters," "The office was not closed.” I asked
him to take it up at his convenience."
This witness is quite clear-"If it is a Chinese letter I give it back to No. 1, the defendant. If a European letter, I return it to Mr. Solly the same day."
Both the Post-Master General and Mr. Solly are quite clear on this point-undelivered Chi- nese correspondence is to be delivered to the de- fendant, who should hand it the same day either to the Assistant Postmaster or the Chief Clerk, albeit there is no rule to that effect in the book
of instructions, nor have the prosecution shown that these Rules have been brought to the notice of the postmen and messengers. The Postmaster General deposed that they were "available,” but no record or proof was produc- ible to the Court that the men had received copies.
The Chief Clerk, however, deposed that he had frequently received from the defendant re- turned Chinese correspondence: "I have re- ceived letters from him within the last three months." (7.10.98). Defendant cannot, there- fore, plead ignorance.
[November 5, 1808.
Mr. Slade (instructed by Mr. Brutton) attended on behalf of defendants.
PIRATICAL ATTACK ON A STEAM- LAUNCH.
the defence it was asserted that the letter had been tendered and refused. Defendant stated he had frequently taken letters to the same address. Defendant has three years ser- vice as a good character. Can" lawful authcrity or excuse" be construed to legalise the posses. sion of the letter by the defendant in his room three months after it should have been delivered or returned to the Post Office anthorities in the Post Office P It cannot. After three years service the plea of ignorance in extenuation is inadmissable. Sentence confirmed. Six months' imprisonment with hard labour. Exhibit A to No lists of Chinese seamen's boarding be retained for seven days, and if no appeal is houses, of which it appears there are 71 (pay-lodged to be returned to the Post Office. ing an annual fee of $25 to the Treasury), are kept at the Post Office, or any lists of Chinese names. The Kwong I Kwok at 82, Stanley Street, licensed as a seamen's boarding house since 1st September, 1895, appears to have been established there for 6 or 7 years, and has a lamp over the street door, 8 or 9 feet from the Another piratical attack on a steam-launch ground, 2 feet broad and 1 foot high, bearing trading on the West River has to be reported. the inscription Kwong I Kwok, 3rd floor" in The Tungkong, a launch commanded by a red characters about 5 inches in height on Chinese Captain, left Kongmoon at five o'clock the glass. There is also a white sign-board on Monday afternoon for Hongkong with a con on the top-floor verandah, 6 ft. 5 in. long siderable number of passengers on board. About by ft. 6 in. high, with the inscription seven o'clock, when approaching the mouth of the "Licensed boarding-house for 16 Chinese river, twenty-four men who had taken passage seamen, kept by Tsoi Yuen Kee," in Eng- by her rose and took charge of the launch, and lish and Chinese in black letters and characters at the same time a boat that had been lying in 34 inches to 4 inches in height. The board is wait with some sixteen more of the gang made sloped so that the inscription is easily legible its appearance. As is usual on such occasions, from the street. The board was in good con- the launch people were unable to offer any effec- dition and the lettering ólear on the 9th inst. tive resistance, and the pirates were left to carry With the exception of the open letter alleged out their designs unmolested. They took all to have been forwarded to Canton, no attempt the passengers' luggage and the passage money has been made by the Post Office to deliver the that had been collected or board, the booty letters and post card found, up to the time they amounting in all to about $2,600. Having sat came into possession of the Court. This, how-isfied themselves that they had sooured all that ever, is in accordance with the practice-the was worth carrying away the pirates rowed off Chief Clerk deposing that no letters are ever in their boat, leaving the launch to come on to sent out a second time, but that they are re- Hongkong. No loss of life occurred in connec: tained for two months whilst being advertised tion with the affair. in the Government Gazette, and then they are returned to the country of origin.
|
The absence of apparent motive for conceal- ment has been dwelt on by the defence, and it is not for the Court to impute motives. The al- most complete immunity from inspection or sur- veillance, however, enjoyed by the employees in their quarters must be noted in connection with the plea of absence of concealment. Defendant has served for 15 years with a good character, and it is contended by the defence that this cor- respondence was in his custody in his quarters with lawful authority and excuse, i.e., that that lawful authority which brought this correspon- dence originally into his hands continued inde- finitely for all time and extended to all places, This contention may be dismissed briefly as idle, and in the face of common sense. Ignorance as a plea for extenuation cannot be put forward in view of the fact that he had returned correspon- dence to his superiors frequently and within the last three months. It is a source of regret to the Court that under the circumstances it has to exercise its limited jurisdiction. Sentence confirmed. Six months' imprisonment with hard labour (the period already served to count to wards completion of sentence).
Exhibits A, B, C, D, and J to be retained for seven days, and if no appeal is lodged, then to be returned to the Post Office.
REGINA V. LI HO
This case, the charge being precisely similar to the last, came before the Court on the same date, viz,, the 21st ult., and was similarly dealt with. A rehearing was granted on the 27th ult., on the same grounds, the case being called on subsequent dates and committed for trial at the Criminal Sessions on the 15th inst., was remitted back to this Court on the 18th. The defence is practically the same, albeit admit- ting that the prosecution had made ont a prima facie case. In this case only one letter was found in defendant's room; it bore a full direc- tion and address and the stamp of the Singa- pore Post Office, dated 30th May, 1898. It had no Hongkong post mark. The addressee had lived at the direction named on the letter, 48, Stanley Street, for ten years, and for six years previously three doors off at No. 54. The addressee had received a letter from the same correspondent produced the enve- lope-at Singapore on September 17th, 1897, and was anxiously expecting another. For
CHINESE REBELS IN HONGKONG.
In consequence of the dispersion of the rebels in the neighbourhood of Wuchau three of the leaders have taken refuge in Hongkong, and the Chinese Government are endeavouring to get hold of them. We are given to understand that the Viceroy of Canton through his at- torueys here has written H.E. the Governor stating that the men are hidden at the Ameri- can Consulate here and asking if the Consul-
General is not as amenable to the laws of the
-
colony as anybody else. We have reason to believe, however, that the Viceroy has been incorrectly informed, and that such an asylum
applied for on the ground that they were American citizens from, San Francisco was refused them.
NEGLECTING A NOTICE OF THE SANITARY BOARD,
HEAVY PENALTIES.
Hajee Mahomed Sodeck, of 27, Gage Street, has had to pay heavily for his dilatoriness in carrying out the directions of the Sanitary Board. At the Magistracy on 3rd Oct. Mr. Duggan, clerk to the Magistrate, produced the depositions relating to a case heard on the 12th September against defendant for not complying with a notice served upon him by the Sanitary Board to effect certain improvements in his drains. A fine of $25 was imposed and an order made that the work was to be completed within one month, defendant being warned that he would be liable to a penalty for every day after the 12th Oct, that the work was not com- pleted. Mr. Duggan also produced the deposi tions in another case against defendant which was heard on the 18th of October for neglecting to comply with the order of the Magistrate of Sep. 12th. In this case defendant was fined $10 for every day which had elapsed since the expiration ofthe order—a total of $60 and he was further informed that he would be liable to a further fine of $10 a day during his default. On the 27th October a memorandum was received from the Sanitary Board stating that the work was completed the previous day.
Mr. Looker, who appeared for defendant, said he had asked an architect to come and give evidence as to the time taken to complete th work, but he had just received a note from him
!
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.