April 28, 1900 1
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
|
latter, the practice of the Court had been in regard to
ments
achieving great ends with n_minimum | to the Director of Public Works, and then calls of disturbance is a remarkable, and in ed on him and offered him $1,000, it might be some respects an admirable, spectacle. impossible to say which of the applications he Her doings in Coren nṛe therefore all the | the conduct of the Director of Public Works as, omit to dʊ, and he thought that that w
had specially in view. He wanted to influence
SUPREME COURT.
set out definately the sot m to incline the public
289
more difficult to understand. They are
public servant and incline him to consider bis The defendant was co
· producing a feeling of deep unrest through applications, or some of them favourably, but it it was which he had sought to incline the public
clearly informed out the Orient, and their results are al-
might be impossible to prove exactly what he servant to do or to emit to do; and he therefor together incommensurate". But it can had in his mind. Hə, submitted that to was sufficiently informed as to the offence hardly be e said that these results are seen require the indictment to specify more than charged against him. As regarded the first of at all yet. Some of the efforts are seen, the Ordinence set out and required, would the three specified cases, the case where a bribe others are suspected, but the real results be to greatly mar the utility of the was offered with a view to influence the con ore not likely to be revealed until they are
general words, advisedly used in the Ordin. duct of a public servant as such public servant, fairly secured, as-- is Russin s invariable me
ance. Here the case had been committed by the question now was whether it was sufficient thod of procedure. This is the great advan- what the Inspector of Nuisances had asked him
the Magistrate and the accused knew exactly in framing an indictment to state the offence tage which a government like that of Russin to do, viz., to remove certain obstructions and, attention of the defendant to the specific matter in merely general terms without directing the has over no
popular governments. Japan has thereupon, he goes to the Inspector's house and with regard to which the conduct had refernce. embarked on a form of the latter, and she offers him a bribe to influence his conduct as a The general rule with regard to indicments hus suffer from the disadvantages of po- public servant. He felt a difficulty in specify was that they must contain sufficient particu- pular discussion on foreign policy as well as ing exactly what he wanted the Inspector to larity of allegation to enable the defendant to enjoy the advantages of individual freedom. not interfere with the obstructiors or the meet. There was no doubt that in recent yenis –
do; probably it was to let him alone and know what the charge wus which Le had to accused; but if he alleged a certain intention in considerable changes had taken place in the the indictment except an intention to influence practice of the law with regard to indictments. the conduct of the Inspector as a Public Ser. They all know that at one time excessive par- vant, be tied his hands and enabl d'the Counsel ticulars were insisted upon, Now a more rea- for the accused to make out some other, perhaps, sonable rule revailed, and it was sufficient if equally objectionable, intention, which however an indictment in substance contained a state- would be outside the specifically limited chargement of fact which enabled the defendant The tendency of wise modern legislation was to know definitely enough what was the change do away with the numerous petty technical ob. | which he had to answer. He had to consider jections to indictments which at one time found favour with the Courts when punishments were excessive. Continuing the Attorney-General said he thought the objection was taken because Mr. S'ade was a little disappointed with the form of the indictment. His friend might be prepared with an elaborate argument to show that in regard to one of the three matters in question Wilmer had exceeded his duty in requiring the thing to be taken down. He did not wish to take up the elaborate argu ment as to what Wilmer's precise duties were in regard to all these matters, and be carefully omitted to say this bribe was given with a view to induce him not to do his duty. His friend did not like that form of indictment. He would
April 20th, 1900.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS.
BEFORE SIR JOHN CARRINGTON. (CHIEF JUSTICE).
ALLEGED ATTEMPT TO BRIBE,
Tsoi Tseung was charged that on the second of April he did unlawfully offer to one H. E. Wilmer, Inspector of Nuisances, a bribe of $5 with a view to influence bis conduct as such public servant.
The Attorney-General (the Hon W. Meigh Goodman), instructed by Messrs Dennys and Bowley, appeared for the prosecution and Mr. W. M. Slade (instructed by Mr. Heyes) for the prisoner,
A
Before the jury was empannelled, Mr. Slade mored the court to quash the indictment, on the gronud that the offence was not
To
in this case whether the present indictment disclosed the charge with sufficient partion. larity to enable the defendant to answer the charge. He must say that he did not think it did. He thought it was framed in too general terms. He thought the indictment ought to show the defendant what the matter was with reference to which he was charged with enden. veuring to influence the public servant in his conduct.
The Attorney General suggested the rcdition to the indictn ent of the words " with segard to his action es regards certa'n cbstructions în the public streets and side channels.":
His Lordship, however, did not consider (lis sufficient; and suggested that
stated with sufficient particularity. It was only much rather he had said the bribs was given to | adjourn until two o'clock ”e court al cuid
|
临
Mr. Slade, in reply, said he only asked fo have the facts on which the prosecution intend- ed to rely. There was no question of elaborate indictment. All which was required was a short statement of facts in respect of which the man's conduct was being influenced.
that in the meantime the Attorney-General should further consider the indictment and supply Mr. Elade with an amended copy.
This suggestion was adopted.
On the court reassembling the Attorney General submitted the emended indictment as follows: That on the 2nd day of April, 1900, one Horace Edgar Wilmer was a pull creivant Lolding the office of Inspecter of Knisizes in this colony, and one Tsoi Tseung was then engaged upon certain building operations at 36, 388, Fid-€90. Queen's icad West, at Vict- oria in this Colony and that on the day- aforesaid the said Horace Edgar Wilmer as such public servant requested the rad Tsoi Tseung to remove certain obstinctions in Queen's road West and Chin Kwong stent, caused by a mat-shed and tuilding materials apparently connected with such building opera tions, and thereupon the said Teoi Treung in the day aforesaid, but after such request had been made at Vietor a in this colony, upli wfully did offer to the said H. E. Wilmer, the raid H. E. Wilmer then being such public servant as aforesaid, a brite, to wil the sum of £5, with a view to influence the conduct of the faid H. E. Wilmer ss such public servant as aforesaid in relation to his sotion with regard to such obstructions as aforesaid,”
put in general terms, whereas the particulars of to Wi ́mer with a view to induce him to do an the offence should be given. Mr. Slade proceeded act contrary to his duty. This would have to argue the point at some length aid sub-laid upon his Lordship the onus of saying what mitted that a prisoner was entitled to know the the exact duty of Wilmer was. Therefore he specific acts and the specific intent with which charged him in the exact words of the Ordinance, those acts were alleged to have been done which that was that the bribe was given to Wilmer were charged against him. This was not a with a view to influence his conduct as public question of a mere matter of form, but was servant." What the prisoner wanted was to really a question of a matter of substance. To prevent Wilmer from interfering with him at show the importance of the indictment being all. amended, from the prisoner's point of view, he might state that as the indictment stood a per- fectly new case could be sprung upon the prisoner which did not appear on the indictment at all.
The Attorney-General said that in former days when punishments were very excessive a varisly of technical objections were taken which in more His Lordship said the application to, the court modern times would be simply atrocious. It in this case was to quash the indictment in the was felt that the punishment of death for felony first instance, and he might say at once that he was so very severe that if any loop-hole could be thought there was no ground alleged why the found for people to get through it used to indictment should be quashed. Then the next be attained, such as the wrong spelling of a point was whether the indictment was too gen- man's name, but he thought they had goteral ought and to be amended by stating with more enlightened times now, Section more particularity the offence charged against of the Ordinance No. 3 of 1898 prohibited the defendant. That question turned to some ex- the offering of a bribe to any public servant, tent on the construction of the Ordinance under for either of three purpose, vis:“(a) with a which the indictment was laid. Section 4 of view to influence his conduct as such public the Misdemeanours Punishment Ordinance of servant, (b) to incline him to do or omit to do 1898 read as follows Every person who an set contrary to his duty as such public gives or offers, or causes or procures to servant, (c) to incline him to do any act contrary be given or offered, to any public ser- to the rules of honesty and integrity want any bribe for himself or for any In this case the indictment alleged the first of other person, with a view to influence his these three offences and set out the offence în conduct as such public servant, or foincline him the words of the Ordinance. The defendant's to do or to omit to do, an act contrary to his counsel wanted set out in the indictment in duty as such public servant or contrary to the
way it was alleged the defendant wished rules of honesty and integrity, shall be guilty | case, CASINGE
blic servant's conduct to be infinenced; of a misdemeanour and, being convicted thereof,Hi
what it was he shall be liable to imprisonment, with or without To insist on this was to hard labour for any term not exceeding tw "the oriental | years, or to a fine not exceeding five hundred
than the dollarwor to both. It appeared from this s
to do. that there were thres specifio caved in view allega: first to influence the co Phi public servan
to
act
don to fat.
dant
sdõpt his | as such public servant ;
adly to incline-
་་་
I to into do page to do an act contrary to his dat
oline him
and thirdly to do any act edutrary, to th sent in · rules of Honesty and integrity“ Taking the
3.
|
Further argument then fook place en an. other point raised by Mr. Slade. Mr. Slade contended that such buisances as those men- tioned here were nuisances dealt with by the Building Ordinance and not by the Fublic Health Ordinance, and that therefore, - Wil. mer was not
fake proceedings in the
suïtaxcés and
by the Ordin
the Ordinance. “A
· important because. extent the dinance. Therefore,
mor reful connic
nitin
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.