April 28, 1000;}
enactment, but there was a special procedure pointed out in regard to nuisance in this section and that procedure was that any con- stable belonging to the Police Force might without warrant take the offender into custody, or, if the offence was committed out of view of the constable, any party injured or annoyed might make a complaint. As he had already said, the Ordinance was concerned with a large number of nuisance affecting the public order and public convenience, and the question arose whether Inspectors of Nuisances had jurisdic. tion under this Ordinance. It was quite clear that jurisdiction in respect to a large number of these nui ances would be quite outside the scope of their general function, He thought, before it could be found that an Inspector of Nuisances had jurisdiction or power in respect of any matter under the Ordinance, it would be necessary to show that that jurisdiction and power were conferred either by Ordinance or regulation or standing order. There was nothing of that kind before him and he could not hold as the law stood, that an In. spector of Nuisances could select any of the nnisances in the Ordinance and hold that he had power in respect of them and proceed to put that power into force. His Lordship thought that that would not be in accordance with the law. On the whole he thought the conclusion to which he had come was that in this case it was not shown that there was any law to sup- port the allegation in the indictment, that in requesting the removal of this obstruction from the public street the prosecutor was acting as a public servant-that was to say as an In- spector of Nuisances-that he had jurisdiction to make the request and to take the proceedings in respect of this obstruction. He thought there fore that, on the face of the indictment, there was no law to support this material allegation, proof of which would be necessary if a trial took place, and that Mr. Slade's argument was well founded and the indictment disclosed no offence cognisable by the law. He thought, therefore, that the result must be that the indictment may be quashed and the defendent discharged., The Attorney-General-I don't propose to file any other indictment. I could not alter the facts in any way. Some days ago I may say I felt the difficulty in this case, and I had some doubt. However, I came to the conclu- sion that it would be better to leave the matter before your Lordship.
I
His Lordship then discharged Tsoi Tseung from the bar and thanked the gentlemen who had been summoned as jurymen for their attendance.
23rd April.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR JOHN CAR- RINGTON (CHIEF JUSTICE) AND A SPECIAL JURY.
THE MURDER OF AN INDIAN SOLDIER, Ghebs Khan, a private in the Hongkong Regiment, was charged with the wilful murder of a Lance Corporal in the same regiment of the name of Goolam Hassan on the 8th March. The prisoner pleaded not guilty.
The jurors were Messrs. G. L. Tomlin (fore man), G. W. F. Playfair, B. Layton, E. Osborne, W. II. Gaskell, W. Danby and R. M. Gray.
The Attorney-General (the Hon. W. Meigh Goodman), instructed by Messrs, Dennys and Bowley (Crown Solicitors), prosecuted on behalf of the Crown and Mr. M. W. Slade (instructed by Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist) appeared for the prisoner.
The Attorney-General said the Hongkong Regiment was divided into companies and each company was divided into seotions. Each com- pany had a block of buildings to itself at Kow- loon, and each look contained four large rooms two below and two above. The room occupied by No. 4 section of B company —–the section to which the prisoner and the murdered man be- ned to have been about 91 feet
ndahs ran along the he longs
and
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
291
Ditta was asleep on his bed and only half heard and did not see the blows struck
The evidence for the defence was then called,
25th April
Khan, a private in the Hongkong Regiment, of The hearing of the charge against Gheba murdering a Lance-Corporal in the same regi-
ment of the nameof Goolam Hassan was resumed, The evidence for the defence was continued he first took the statement of Alla Ditta in Inspector Macdonald, on being recalled, said writing between 9 and 11 p.m. on the 8th March at the Police Station at Yaumati, Jewan Khan afterwards. They were not told they would be was present and gave his statement immediat-ly called as witnesses.
aa
Fazil Khan, a a private who occupied the same was sleeping on his bed on the 8th March when room as the prisoner and the deceased, said he he was awakened at 1.55 pm, by the sound of somebody stamping on the floor. He heard the prisoner, who was on the verandah, call ont also called Goolam Hassan a bad name and "Goolam Hassan, you are troubling me" He added, "I will go to the Subadar and report you." Goolam Hassan was laid down on his bed at the time, and the other men id the room see who was abusing Goolam Hassan. He then were asleep: Sahib Din went to the loor to went to the deceased's bed, and spoke to him. but found that the man was unconscious. The witness roused. Allah Ditta, telling him a mur- der had been committed.'.
•
a passage between the rows. The walls | were pierced by windows, and in about the middle of each side there was a door which opened out from the room itself on to the veran- dak, there being a north verandah and a south verandah. As regarded the time of the occur. rence, it appeared to have taken placs between half-past one and two o'clock, which was gene- rally a slack time of day. Between half-past one and two o'clock on the afternoon of the 8th March, while in his room, the deceased seemed to have received some blows on his head. These blows must have been heavy and violent blows caused by some heavy instrument, and he thought the jury would be of opinion that the blows were inflicted by an instru ment which was not sharp. The man died at about half-past five the same afternoon in Hospital, and from the time he received the blows until the time of his death he seemed to have been unconscious. The medical evidence would show that although the onter skin was not burst, yet the skull was fractured across from one temple to another, and small frag ments of bone were found, and there was an effusion of blood on the brain. Death ensued from coma at 5.30 p.m. on the 8th March, When the jury heard the evidence he thought they would be of opinion that death was caused by the blows received on the skull about the time he had mentioned on the 8th March. When they had heard the evidence he thought they would be of opinion that the hand which inflicted these blows was the hand of the prisoner. Of course it would be uccessary for the jury to consider very carefully all the circumstances and the evidence, in order that they might arrive at a sound conclusion as to the mode in which and the circumstances ander which the blows were inflicted. It might be that the evideneca would be conflicting on that point. He should be able to call before them two witnesses, who would say that they personally saw the blows intlicted. The first man he should call was Alla Ditta Khan, a private in B Company and belonging to No. 4 section. He stated that the the previous day two of the jurors spoke to him His Lordship said that after the adjournment deceased was asleep on his bed, and that the outside and said they would like to see the sac- prisoner took up a broom from the fire-place tion room. and struck the deceased twice on the head with
He told them they had better not it. He said the deceased did not move, but be.
go informally by themselves, but that he would take the opinion of the jury as to whether they came insensible, and that he was shortly after-wished to go or not. If the jury, wished to go wards carried to the Hospital, where he died at he had arranged for a launch to take them at 5.30 p.m. the same day. The other witness he should call was Jewan Khan, another private in they would go or not.
It was for the jury to decide whether the same company. He said that at one o'clock on the 8th March he went to get the rations for the section to which he belonged. He re. turned at about 1.40, and as he was passing the window next to the bed of the deceased-passing along the verandah-he. saw the prisoner hit deceased over the head with a broom and then run away. The prisoner was subsequently ar- rested and taken to the Central Police Sation.
The evidence for the prosecution was then proceeded with.
|
i
24th April.
The hearing of the charge against Gheba Khan, a private in the Hongkong Regiment, of murdering a Lance-Corporal in the same regiment named Goolam Hassan, was resumed.
witness said he was quite sure Allah Ditta was Replying to the Attorney-General, the asleep. He did not go round, but the men were all covered up, with their blankets over their heads. The witness could not explain prisou, r's statement that Allah Ditta came up with ■ stick and interfered with him and Goolam Hassan, unless Allah Ditta struck the low and weat and laid down again immediately after- wards
once.
The jury consulted together, and the Fors- man announced that two wished to go and five did not.
you will go by the majority in t
His Lordship-Well, gentlemen, I suppose
Mr. Slade said it was now his duty to sum up to the jury as clearly and as shortly as may be what he conceived to be the effect of the evidence which they had heard. Before dealing with the evidence it would be conven ent to draw attention to what the Attorney-General mentioned to them in opening the case, name- ly, the various verdicts wh ch it was within their power to bring in on this indictment. The indictment charged the prisoner with murder. On that indictment it was open for them to bring in a verdict of murder, or they might bring in a verdict of manslaughter that The case for the prosecution having been was to say that he killed the man but not with concluded, Mr. Slade opened for the defence. malice aforethought, but killed him without law- He said the facts as given by the witnesses for ful excuse; that it was an unintentional killing. the prosecution pointed to the fact that prisoner Then they could bring in a verdict of not had his master's sword, instead of using which guilty, and a verdict of not guilty did not he picked up a broom, a similar weapon to that necessarily mean that they believed the man to which Goolam Hassan was armed with. The be innocent, but it meant that the prosecution prosecution had shown that deceased was a bigger had failed to bring home satisfactorily. to their and stronger man than prisoner and he only de- minds that the man was guilty either of mur- dended himself. He would call evidence to shower or manslaughter. Then they might bring that prisoner had permission from Captain in what was practically a fourth verdict. That Rowcroft to take his sword into barracks to was to say, they might add a rider their olean it, and he would call Havildar Gama, one verdict, supposing they found the prisoner of the men accused of urging prisoner to guilty of manslaughter, and that it was commit murder, and would show that Havil under circumstances of the gre dar Gama was in his own room.
ation, or that they stron Deen would be proved to have been out of meray, or wh the room at the time of the fransaction. Fux the justice o zel Khan, who was supposed to have been sleep- told on Febr ing on his bed, would be called and to the account of the fray as be reported it to Allsh Deen. Private Gama was asleep
All these w
boar
one important
would tell
but the
Sahib
|
to
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.