C
January 26, 1903. j.
B. L. Bowley, Crown Solicitor), conducted the prosecution in the absence of Sir Henry S. Berkeley, Attorney-Gзneral.
The following jury was empanelled:-Messrs. | J. 8. Porry, E. M. Hazeland, J. W oker, A. Rimjaho, B. Eustacs, V. C. Rozario, and J. M. Noronha.
[
Mr. Sharp said that the charge against the prisoner was one of exposing an infant child. The facte were simple. Ou the 6th of last month at I o'clock in the evening-at which time it was cold and there was a certain amount of rain falling-a constable on duty in Station Street, Yaumati, saw this wo na throw a bandle down on the ground under the cover of a side verandah and then run way. This proceeding arou ed his suspicious and he ran after her, canght her and brought her back. Thea he examined the bundle and it was fouad to contin an infant girl about a month old, wrapped in sacking or something of that sort. Tas con- stable took the woman and the bundle to the police s'ation and the child was immediately so it to the Italian Conve it at Yaumiti and every thing possible was dous to revive it, but it died in the course of that night or early on the following morning. When arrested the wom in stated that the child was not her child,
The police constable who arrested the woman was the first witness called; he give evidence to the same effect as contained in Mr. Sharp's opening statement.
Dr. Hunter, who made a post-mortem exami- nation of the child's body of the 8th December, stated that the child was in a condition of great emaciation; it was 藕 very badly nourished child and in a delicate state of health. The immediate cause of death was diarrhoe. The exposure which the previous witness had spoken of would be sufficient to ondanger the child's life and permanently injure its health.
A Chinese witness corroborated the con- stable's evidenca,
Inspector D. Macdonald, Yaumati, gave formal evidence.
Among the other witnesses was the Yaumati Chinese interpreter, who deposed that when tho woman was interrogatel in the police station she stated that she did not put the child there. She had gone out to buy samshu, and was returning home when a man drew her attention to the child lying on the street. She informed a constable of the fact and he arres.el her as having lefe the child there.
His Lordship, in summing up suid it rested with the jury to decide upon the facts as put before them. Many of the jury, he pointed out.
would be aware how little valu was attached among a certain class of the population to female life among babies and children.
The jury unanimously found the prisoner guilty as libelled.
His Lordship in passing sentenc› said he took iuto consideration that the prisoner was an ignorant Chinese woman and thit as such sus had probably been brought up to look upon it as a natural thing to get rid of a delicate female child by throwing it into a river or in sonse such way.
But Chinese of her class must be educated and taught by example that this thing was not to be allowed with impunity whore His Majesty's flag floate. The sentence would be six months' imprisonment with hard labour.
ARMED ROBBERY,
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT. from his arm a large bangle, which was valued at 850. They afterwards took him into the back-room and tied his hands behind his back with zinc wire. His wife also was attackel by these men a ring was taken from her hand and she was threatened not to mak, any noise. Then the prisoners searched the premises and fonnd $27 bidden in the bid and $3 in the shop. With all the stolen property they safely got away. Prisoner was recognised by a Chinese police constable about three weeks later in Des Vax Road West and, out of twelve others, was identified by the shopkeeper and his wife as the robber who had hell the knife.
Chan Sz was chargal with baring at Mongkok, on 7th December, being then armed with a knife, robbed a shopkeeper and his wife of the sum of about $30, a'g ›ld-mouu'ed bangle. and a silver-gilt ring.
A plea of not guilty was tendered.
The following jury wis empanelled: -M issrs. V. C. Rozario, Cha Choy, E. M Hazeland, Li Wai Ching, A. Nilsson, B. Eustace, and E. J. Main.
After hearing evidenc",
The jury retarded a verlict of gailty.
His Lordship passad senteuse of seven years imprisonment with hard labour, the prisoner to receive a whipping of 2) strokes with the birch within the first week.
The Court adjourned.
In the absence of the Attorney-General, the Crown was represented by Mr T. Morgan Phillips, barrister-at-liw, who in opening the case stated that on the date in question the keeper of a drug-shop at 143, Mongkok was closing up for the night when a man came in ostensibly for the purpose of buying medio ne. He was closely followed by three other men, all Chinese; as soon as they got inside the shop one of them produced a pistol, pointing it to wards the shopkeeper, and another a large kuife or chopper, with which weapon the shopkeeper was also threatened. The robbers told him not to make a noise, then got hold of him and took
Wednesday, 21st January.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION,
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR WILLIAM M. GOODMAN (Chief Justice).
*3
the station, prisoner was examined and his hands and clothes were found to be smelling strongly of kerosene. The theory put forward by the prosecution was that the prisoner had thrown kerosene about the room for the purpose of causing a fire. The defence explained that it got on his hands because he used kerosene with which to wash off the paint or varnish among which he worked all day as a boxmaker. But there was fresh kerosene on his hands and clothes and this was at half-past two in the morning. His under-jacket also was damp with kerosene. On this man being taken to the police station a European constable (P. C.
The
edge) ran to the house and went upstairs. The smoke was then so dense that he could not get into the first floor. He went on the second floor and found nobody there. Then he came down and found in the shop on the ground floor some Chinese, who rau out when he gave the alarm The jury would see that almost simultaneously with the run- ning out of these two men; from the house fire broke out; that these facts pointed to arson was what the prosecution contended. defence set up the cock-and-bull story-ɔr rather
the the cat-and-lamp story-thal prisoner was aslap and was awakened by hearing cals fighting; and that the cats knocked over a lamp and thereby caused the fire. The cat-and- Chui Chong was put in the box on a charge of lamp story would not do. This house was of having on 27th Decembar set fire to a dwelling-three stories. The owner of the spirit-shop rented the whole house, and upon this fact con. house at 318, Queen's Road West.
siderable importance must be placed. This man sub-let the room on the first floor to the prisoner and his partaer as boxmikers. The theory tho Crown put forward ws that the prisoner and his partner and the other man Chui Chung were all coucarned in barsing this bou
CHARGE OF ARSON.
He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr. E. H. Sharp, K.Č., instructed by Mr. J. S. Harston, solicitor.
The following jury was empanelled :-Messrs. H. Scharenborg, T. Binks. Fang Ku Shan, Ahmet Rumjahn, J. M. Noronha, A Nilsson
and W. Goetz
man,
1
The Attorney-General, Hon. Sir Henry S, Barkeley, who appeared for the Crown (instructed by Mr. F. B. L. Bowley, Crown Solicitor) stated in opening the case that the prisoner was charged with having been con corned with others in setting fire to the house in question. The Crow would undertake to prove the charge on circumstantial evidence, that was to say, by adducing to the jury a set of facts connected with the prisoner from which th jury might reasonably draw an inferenc of his guilt. The facts the Crown had to rely upon were these: He iu company with another wh was implicated in a second charg› of arson, was occupying a room of the house 3.8 Queen's Rat West on 27th December last They had been in occupatio of that room for some short time previously. They rented their room-a first-floor room-from Chai Chung who occupied the basement or ground floor, for the purpose of using it in thair trade of box- making. He would direct the attention of the jury to the similarity of the family names of the prisoner and the man from whom the room was ranted. Prisoner's name was Chui Chong. The name of the man who rented them the room was Chui Chung. Thn me Chu--the family nams-was.common to both The importance of this connection was that the ground floor was occupied as a spirit-shop and was insure for 83,007, and evilence would be g.ven to show that the value of the articles in that shop was very small. Ia olher words, by this fire the one of the shop on the ground floor was to get $3,00). On the night of th 26th. it would be proved, the prisoner an his partner occupiat this room on the first floor and the fire originated in the room. 225 on th morning of the 27th a Chinese cou- stable from information receivel was going toward that quirter of thy town when he saw a man running out from the veran lah of No. 318 in what he described as a suspicious min- ner. That man was id uifel as the prisoner's partner in occupying the room on the first floor. Almost immediately after the fiest man had run out and disappeared up the street the con- stable saw the prisoner rauning from the stairs of the sam› house and arrasted him. Upoa baing seiz-1, the pri over sul in a low vaio that the accountant's offis on the first for was on fire. The constable was in plain clothes so that it was reasonable to suppose that the prisoner did
|
|
About
not know that he was a constable. The cou-
stable went upstairs to the first for, still hold ing the prisoner, and fonad smok, coming fro u the room there. He took the prisoner to No. 7 Police Station and gave the alarm of fire. At
|
down in o.der that the owner of the wine- shop should get $1,000 insuranc}
His Lordship comm niod that there was no charge of conspiracy.
The Attorney-General replied that there was not, for the reason that the keeper of the wine- shop hal cleared out.
wers
His Lordship said he made the remark because in the very last case of the kind reported from England he saw that two men charged with onspiracy. That was convenient method of dealing with a cas: and put the whole thing into ons.
a very
The Attorney-Genera' said that would have been done bad they boa able to get hold of the other man Chui Chung. In conclusion ho said he would prove t› the ju y that the boxmaking business carriol on by the prisoner and his partner hid only bn in that house some twenty days before the fire occurred,
Evidenco was then tako ·.
Mr. Sharp in opening the case for the defence said that thoir cise was a complete denial of the allegation of the Crown, who mide all sorts of guesses and suggestions but could not actually toll them how the tire broke out. The evidenca that had been called showed only a caso against the win --shop on the ground floor, the Wing- Tai shop. He did not suggest that the Wing| Tai did this but the whole cass of th› Crown was that the Wing Tai was cɔncerned and if so nothing was easier than for the Wing Tai people to start the fire in the floor abɔre them and so divert suspicion from themselves.
For the defence evidonos was then takon, Li Tong, the man who is charge i with arson in connection with the same fire but in a differ- eat case, was examined.
The Court adjourned.
Thursday, 22nd January, -
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICHON,
BEFORE HIS HONOUR FIR WILLIAM M. GOODMAN (CHIEF JUSTICE).
CHARGE OF ABJN.
Evidence was resume in the case in which Chai Chong was charged with having committed arson by setting fire to a hipass at 318, Queen's Road West on 27th Docsniber,
At the conclusion of the ovidin0) conazo addressed the jury, and his Lordship sammed up, pointing out that when the fica brok, out the prisoner did at give the alarm of fire as be might have been expected to do and thit | the spirit-shop below the premises occupied by the prisoner was very magh over-insured.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.