Page
4
4
January 14, 1905.j
the Belgians to get hold of these bonds to place them on the market, in consequence of which they have been compelled to sell them back to the original American Syndicate. This news will doubtlessly be received with satisfaction;by all Chinese and their foreign friends who have the welfare of China sincerely at heart. We heartily congratulate Sir Chên-tung Liang Cheng and H. E, Sheng Kaug-p30 on the able manner in which they havs conducted a very delicate and important matter to a successful conclusion.
CHINESE EMIGRANTS TO
AUSTRALIA.
ALLEGED CONSPIRACY.
The hearing of the case in which Wong Chuk Yan and Wong Tim were charged with (1) Defrauding one, Han Tim, of the sum of $850; (2) and (3) Unlawfully attempting to defraud and deceive the China Navigation and Eastern and Australian 8.8. Companies by obtaining from the said companies a passenger ticket for one
Han Tim, to enable him to personate one Ah Wai, was continued before Mr. H. H. J. Gompertz at the Police Court on the 10th instant. Mr. F. B. L. Bowley, Crown Solicitor, instructed by Chief Detective Inspector Hanson, prosecuted, and Mr. G. K. H. Brutton represented the first defendant, Wong Chuk Yau.
John William Hanson, Chief Detective In- spector, continued:-I was present when each of the defendants was charged. Their state- ments were taken in my presence.
Cross-examined by Mr. Brutton: I do not think it is necessary to have a phot graph on an Australian naturalisation paper. As far as I know, Wong Chuk Yau is the master of the Chan Hop. The second defendant, Wong Tim, is employed there. The Crown Solicitor directed me to arrest the second defendant. When I saw Hau Sui at the Chan Hop with the papers in his hand he said-" These are what I am to use to
go with." I am sure the photograph produced is of Hau Tim. I do not know whether shipping companies require return passages guaranteed in the case of the Chinese passengers to Australia. The photograph produced (of Hau Tim) is not like Hau Sui.
Douglas Abbey deposed:-I am passenger clerk in Messrs. Butterfield and Swire's, the agents for the China Navigation Co., Ld. I am in charge of the booking of passengers by steamers on the Australian run. We are not
allowed to carry more than 20 Chinese passen- gers without a licence. Our broker brings us a list of the Chinese passengers wanting to go, also a list of papers issued by the authorities in
the Australian States. We would not issue a ticket if a Chinese passenger had no papers from the Australian authorities. I examine the papers when they are brought by intending passengers to the office. The papers are handed to the captain of the ship. He takes charge of them. The exhibit produced appears to be a certificate of naturalisation issued by the Government of South Australia. If a Chinaman had come to me with that paper, and had answered the questions I put to him, I should have given him a ticket. I would not have required him to produce a photograph. Certificates of domicile have photographs on them. If an intending passenger did not agree with the papers produc- ed by him, I should refuse to issue a ticket. If a Chinese passenger arrives in Australia, and the authorities do not find his papers agree with his description, he must be brought back here at the expense of the ship. Each Chinese passon- ger going to Australia must have his return passage guaranteed. The uarantee would be given to the broker, and we would hold him responsible.
h
Cress-examined by Mr. Brutton -Intending immigrants are introduced to our broker by other passenger brokers. We look to our broker for the passage money, so that practically the company does not stand to lose in case of the
• return of a passenger.
Cheung Hok Ling declared:On the 21st December I read over and explained the charge to the first defendant at the Central Station, and after administering the usual caution, he ́made the statement produced.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
Mr. Brutton objected to the statement being put in as evidence, as it was taken in connec- tion with the charge of forgery which had since been withdrawn.
His Worship decided that it should be put in for the present, and the matter as to its admissibility could be argued later.
Mr. Bowley asked permission to put in the letters between Wong Chuk Yau aud Hau Tim, Mr. Brutton objected as the conspiracy had not been proved:
Mr. Bowley: If Wong Tim had taken the papers he got to a shipping company, the com- pany would be liable to be deceived, and if the fraud were discovered, would be put to the expense of bringing the man back.
i
His Worship: It has been given in evidence that the company's broker guarantees the risk
of a loss.
Mr. Bowley: It is quite right that the passage broker recoups the company. The conspiracy is proved in that the two men endeavoured to defraud Hau Tim by obtaining from him the sum of $850 on the representation that they were assisting him to legally land in Australia. On the three charges & prima facie case of conspiracy is established. If a passenger got into Australia the shipping company would be deceived, but not defraude; on the other hand, if he were not allowed to land, the company would have to bring him back.
Was
Mr. Brutton submitted that before the letters were put in the charge of conspiracy must be proved. Not merely in intention, but by agreement between the parties. There bination, and no proof forthcoming to prove no evidence with regard to the com-
that they conspired to defraud the two companies. They might just as well say that he and bis clerk had conspired to defrand some- body in his office. It was impossible for the defendants to actually defraud the shipping companies. The only man who could do that was Hau Tim himself, and if he chose to go to the defendants he was a party to the conspiracy, as he willing to pay $850 for what he knew was a false certificate.
Was
Mr. Bowley said the defendants were acting in concert as the result of a previous agreement He had proved certain acts committed by them, from which the fact that they had agreed together could be inferred.
His
case Worship: The whole turns on the point as to whether there was conspiracy or no conspiracy. If conspiracy is proved the letters go in, and I am bound to commit th case to the Sessions. I will reserve the point.
INTERNATIONAL LAW AGAIN,
[FROM A SOUTH AFRICAN CORRESPONDENT.]
A fact, which has long been known to lawyers and diplomatists, but which has been little understood by the general public, has been brought into unpleasaut prominence by the Russo-Japanese war, namely the slender force of international law. Those who have had to study the subject or have had to deal with it prac- tically bare long been aware that so-called iuter- national law is hardly law in the proper sense of the word Apart from specific treaty obliga- tions, which are not very numerous, there is little beyond very general theory to bind nations upon many of the most important internati- nal questions, and when these come to practical application we have to rely rather upon the
honour and conscientiousness of the nations
concerned than upon any means of enforcing them. Law without the means of upholding it is, however, no law at all, and so-called inter- national law is unfortunately of this nature. Of this we have had of late but too many illustrations, most prominent among which of course stand the Malacca incident and the Baltic fishing flest outrage. The latter, of| course, was of the nature either of an unpar- donable blunder, or, more un pardonable wantonness; and can hardly be brought within the sphere of any discussion of principles of international law. With the Malucca in- oident the matter stood differently. Much plausible argument may be adduced as to the right of search of neutral vessels, and no general principle can be laid down which will cover all cases. Such principles as exist are largely derived fre Jurists who, eminent'
29
though they were in their time, still dealt with a state of facts totally different from those existing in the present day. Grotiuss Vattel, and other eminent authorities, will carry us but a small distance in practically dealing with any question that may now arise, and even such authorities as Wheaton and Story are, for the same reasons, often but partial guides in circumstances totally different from any with which they were acquainted. Let scholars discus as much as they like the principles of interna- tional law, it is the Governments concerned who have to apply them, and who do so for the most part, when at all events one side is actuated by the strongest feeling and at times pressed by the direst necessity. Under such circumstances it can hardly be expected that the nicest dis- crimination will be observed in the application of principles of international law, even if those principles were not sufficiently vague in them- s Iva
that one of the most eminent exponents of It is not very surprising, therefore, to find
international law, Mr. Dicey, should recently
have come forward and assured us that the branch of Law to which be bas devoted
very little
of
י
prac-
so much study is really of tical use in the settlement of international disputes, and that in effect the public generally are very ignorant in imagining that it could possibly be 80. The spectacle is sad no doubt. but it also instructive, and it is at least valuable in a very important direction. It is something to have one, whose intimate acquaintance with international law makes it impossible for op- ponents of his views to assert that he does not know what he is talking about, on the side of th common sense eople who have always ques. tioned the possibility of establishing interna ional tribunals, or of finding some preventives for Wai io. an
imaginary High Court Arbitration, Such an ideal, however attractive it may be, must be regarded as merely an ideal by all who judge by facts, sad not by feelings. Mr. Dicey points to the impossibility of maintaining anything like strict neutrality when once political feelings are fairly aroused; and upon this ground he endeavours to exonerate Germany from many of the charges which he considers have been unjustly made against her in the British Press, in connec- tion with the war. Neutrality, in fact, is considered by him to he almost an impossibility, and in this he is probably not very far from the truth. Whether all his deductions from the fact can be followed must be matter of opinion; but it must be admitted that he bas touched the weak point of international law with considerable accuracy. Principles usually discussed in times of peace with scholastic uicely have to be applied in times of war, when necessity, which proverbially knows no law, in- ternational or other, must be the guiding motive. In the end, their maintenanc› mast depend upon a more enlarged view of national advantige than the majority of even tried Statesmen are found to possess. What may be very advantageous (n one occasion to a nation, may prove eminently the contrary on. another; and far-sighted Statesman, even in times of stress or of actual war, will be slow to act on any principle which, if the circumstances become reversed, may be turned with serious effect against themselves. This bearing of the subject has been very much lost sight of by Russia on many occasions during the war; but it is to be hoped that it has not been forgotten by our own Statesmen and those of other countries. With respect to purchase from neutrals of couvertible trading ressels and the like acts, it might be poor policy on our part to press such a point further than it should be legitimately carried; as obviously the occasion might arise when we might wish to do very much the same thing; and, in the same way, it would be impolitie on our part to press too strongly against the right to search neutral vessels, as this right must be of the greatest importance to any nation dependent upon her naval resources. In all such cases the most that can be relied upon is bona fides and states- manly foresight on the part of the nations con- cerned. Any attempts to press international laws further must be productive of disappoint-
ment-and as to the idea that some interns- tional tribunal might be established, whose dictates in the event of disputes arising would have the effect of for ever averting war, one
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.