July 27, 1903.]
given to the defendant, and regarding which | the latter had made a roport. Witness had beard nothing of the affair, and did not know of enquiries into it made by the police.
I
The Court adjourned shortly after one o'clock. On the Court resuming after tiffio, The Attorney-General, after consultation with counsel for the defends, stated that they concurred in respect of this matter of the state- ment by the defendant who was offered a bribe on | the 2nd June and returned it to the prsous offering it and he must say it seemed to him on the evidence in possession that two men did go to the Inspector's house on the 1st or 2nd June aud left a sum of money with his servants to be given to him. At that time defendant was absent from home. When he returned to the house he sent for the men next day and returned them the. money, and he reported the acidout and it was put into the hands of the police The police made investigations and got certain information which required corroboration of implication. The only person who could speak to that was the Luspector himself because the house servants who in the ordinary course would havo been called wore not available owing to their having loft the service of the defendant in the Incantime. The police fee still waking endeavours to get hold off the witness who would enable them to go on with the charge of offering a bribe. When the time came he would submit some facts to the jury to the effect that as a fact at the time the defendant refu-ed to receivo this offered bribe and reported the attempted bribery bo Wax nware that charges had been made against him of receiving bribes, and he would suggest that the inference to be drawn might be that defeudaut thought it was too dangerous a thing to take a furtbor bribe.
!
1
+
·
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
Wednesday, 22nd July.
The trial was resumed of Robert Gard ner McEwen.
Ip Cheong was again pul into the box. Gross-examined by Mr. Stads, he said the defendant had Lought poultry from him for a number of years past. Wituess had been to defendant's house three times the third time in connection with the guild busines. Ho had not been there nearly every mouth to collect his bills. He had not been on the roof of the hose where the defendant kept his poultry and pigeons: he did not know that defendant kept live poultry and pigeons. On Christmas Day last your witness with two others went to defendant's house about half-pist four o'clock. They west iu rickshas and drove up to the door of the house. The strat door was open. Witness did not ring the door-bell. Tho two others were behind bim and he did not know whether or not they rung the bell. They all went upstairs together, he going first. He thonght Lam King Shang followed next to him aud Wu Kam came last. Witness on going upstairs, pushed open the door and outered the sitting-room, calling out at the same time for the Inspector. Two Europeaus were in the room, Quo of them spoke to them, and they walked with him through the room on to the verandab and thence to the verandah of the next house. :
From there ho could not see the two, Europeaus in the sitting-room. The Inspector came down and told the three of them to wait. Nane of them spoko to the defendant afforward ·
Re-examiued by the Attorney General Whon the Tuspector said, “Man-mgic” and went away into the next house with the European in whoss company he came down from the roof,, wine waited until he came back and then Leung San, account of the Sau Fu said. Here are some cigars presented to you poultry shop in the Western Market, which, by the guild," and Lam King Shaug handed kept the accounts of the poultry guild in Julyhim the envelope containing the $107 last, said he made a payment during that mouth to Fung Yung of $10 that was ou 14th July. He entered it in the book.||
Leung Sin, accountant of the Leung Hop poultry-shop, said that thatshop kept the guild's accounts in September last During that mouth he made a payment of $17 to the defendant; that was on the 14th. He was authorised by the guild to pay the Inspector that money, He entered the payment in the book before the money was actually handed over. He paid over the money in defendaut's house between 7 and 8 pm. Addressing the Inspector, he said "I have come to make you a presont on behalf of the guild." Dofondant asked "How much?" and added Can do." The notes were onclosed if a Chinese cuvelopp, There was no one elso present whou he paid over this money.
Clan Wong deposed that he handed over $120 on behalf of the poultry guild to defendant on 24th December. Lai Kan went with him, and gave defeudaul 830-altogether 815).
Cross-examined-There was a bell at the prisoner's honso, but he did not ring it; he walked s raight in at the floor, which was open. The defendant was alone in the house.
Lai Kan, master of the San Fu poultry-shop, corroborated the evidence of the last witness, and said he gave the defendant $30 ou 24th December last, the day on which Chan Wong gave him $120,
Cross-examined The Hefendant had taken away witness's licence, and the latter went to the Registrar-General and got it back. He rang the bell on the ground floor when he went to the defendant's house, and the defendant came down and opened the door..
Here the witness corrected himself and said he had not pulled the bell, and that the defen- dant did not descond to the ground floor and open the door.
Ip Choung was the first witness called to support the charges of bribery from the Central Market. He said he was one of the masters of the Yam Fat Looug poultry-shop, Coutral Market, and that subsequent to a guild meeting held on 19th December last the defendant said to him, in reply to a question as to what he should like for Christmas “ Give me the money and I will buy something myself.” „On Christ- mas Day the defendant was givon $100 aud four boxes of cigars. He was a troublesome man, and they gave him the presents in order to induce him to cease from annoying.
The Court at this point adjourned,
:
|
1.
By the Court-He did speak to defendant, that afternoon.
Wu Kam of the Tai Choung poultry-shop in the Coutral Markot, gave corroborativo evidence. He deposed that Ip Choong handed dofondaut the four boxes of cigars, and Lam King Shang gave him the envelope containing the stOÜ, Io saw the $100 put into the euvelope. It was the money of the guild.
:
:
¦
i
69
document were referred to, the other side had not a right to demaud that it should be put in
The Attorney-General said he had proposed to prove a fct and had suggested that his friend should concur in what he knew to be a fact, and by way of explaining to bis Lordship what he desired to do he said if bis Lordship referred to the depositions be would find that this man had not been
cross-examined.
His Lordship remarked that the only evidenco he had noted was that the witness said 87 himself. He did not propose to refer to the depositions. Mr Slade asked his Lordship to make a note of his application for the depositions to be put in and its refusal,
The Attorney-General stated that as the depositions might be of some advantage to the defendant and as he was utterly unbias sed in the watter, he intended at the conclusion of the es to put the depositious in, but not on this poiut.
Mr. Slade -That is entirely satisfactory. His Lordship-1' is a very fair thing. I have no objectio to the depositions going iu.
Lam King Shang, accouŭlan' of the Kwong Wing Yusa poultry-shop, Ceutral Market, cor- roborated the evidenco given by the two pro- vious witnesses He stated that he handed tho envelope co staining the $100 to the Inspector. Ip Cheong hauded him the four boxes of cigars ; these were of the brand “Christing Porfecto,' and there were twenty-five ins.ch box. The money was given to the Inspector becanso be had een constantly giving the poultry-
dealers trouble.
; The Attorney-General said hat in view of
vidence
had the
given he
utt appli- cation to make to his Lordship. In tho detormination of the issues between the Crown and the defendant he wished to make an amendment, to add to the indio!ment that the defendant received, as well as money, four boxes of cigars Under the Criminal Procedura Ordinance (No. 13 of 1899), rection 55, sub-section 1, if there appeared to be a variance between the truth and the charge of the indictment or any count, the Court might amend the indictmeat. The defence could not be prejudicod by the addition that the defendant received by way of a bribe these cigars bag (USO all through the depositions, which his Lordship was entitled to read under the Ordinance, each witness after speaking of the present of $103 on Christmas Day added that four toxes of ciga s wero alsɔ presented to him at tho samis time. Dofondnut therefore had known from the first that one of the allegations against him was that he received a present of four boxes of cigars as well as the $100. In framing the indictment the matter of the cigars was left nuiucl.del and the charge was ouly of roogiving movey. He had intended to use the r ceipt of the cigars in the way of corroborative statement by the witnes-es thit they had given him the $100, but he could see from the attitude of his learned friend that technical objections might His Lordship remarked that he thought that be made to the jury considering this receipt of question could be asked. If the depositions: the oigars unless the fact appeared as a charge were referred to they must be put in.
Cross-examined—Iù going downstairs when leaving the house, witness wout first, Lam King Shang secoud, and Ip Cheong third.
Lam King Shang was next called and sworn. The Attorney-General said that if his Lord. ship referred to the depositions he would find that the previous witness was not cross-examined before the Magistrate
Mr. Slade objected to the depositions being referred to unless they wore going to be put iu. The Attorney-General said that in that case he would re-call the witness and ask whether ho was or was not cross-examined before the Magistrate.
Wa Kam was re-called.
Mr. Slade argued that therefore as tho Attorney-Gouer I had referred to the deposi- tions and had stated their coutouts he had a right to demand that they be put in. The Attorney-General had said, "If your Lordship will refer to the depositions you will find that so-and-so is in thei."
His Lordship-I do not propose to refer to the depositious to see whether you are right or wroug
;
1
Mr. Slade I demand, as my friend has made; reference to the contents of these depositions, that they be put it. He said, "If you will refer to the depositions you will find in them that this
man was not cross-examined."
The Attorney-General-I could not say that you would find in the depositions a thing that is not in them.
Mr. Slade-It is stated in the depositions, and my friend knows it and referred to it, that there were no questions asked by me of the witness.
His Lordship-You can ask the witness whether or not he was gross-examined before the Magistrate.
The Attorney-General put the question to Wu Kam, who replied, "No."
Mr. Slade asked for a ruling on the question of law, as to whether when the contents of a
4
in the ind ctment. In the interests of the determination of the issues involved he would ask his Lordship to exercise the power given him under the Ordinance to allow an amendment
in the indictment to the effect that defendant received four boxes of cigars as well as the $10: on Christmas Day by way of a bribe. Suppos: ing the amendment was not made now there would be nothing to prevent the Crown from subseque tly charging the d-fendant with having received four boxes of cigars, and the whole proceedings, whatever the result might be in this case, would be gone all over again. It was in order to prevent unnecessary trials or repetition of trials that the Legislature iu England and here - following the law of the mother country-bad given the Court power to make necessary amendments such as he asked his Lordship to make now.
Mr. Slade opposed this absolutely unprece dented, and he ventured to say, improper application, made at t e last moment, at the very close of the evidence. This amendmene which he asked to be made was not an amendt ment of a variance.
His Lordship said he quite agreed with the counsel for the defence. He could not admit the amendment. The amendments contemplated. by section 55 were not such as that now proposed. But supposing a man was charged
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.