288
the entries.
Mg
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
He went to the branch office to section 26, sub-section 2 of the Evidence that morning because he was told to call on Ordinance which declared that the Hongkong important business. He did not go of his own Government Gazette, and any Government accord to ask for chloride of lime for the use of Gazette in any country, colony or dependency the latrines.
in His Majesty's dominions should be proof by a fair production thereof before the Court. Sub-section 3 of the said Ordinance stated that all proclamations, acts and nominations of appointment appearing in sach Gazette could be proved by the production thereof.
The next witness was W. Bowen Rowlands, but as he was unwell, the Attorney-General asked permission to read his evidence, in which he stated that the subpoenas in this case were issued by him by order of the Commission.
The Attorney-General. I now propose to call Mr. Fraser, a clerk in the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank.
Cross-examined Witness got chloride of lime from the branch office. He asked the senior inspector for it, but did not ask for any at the end of Juus or the beginning of July, He could not speak English, so he spoke to Inspector Connolly through an interpreter. He spoke to him at the branch office on June 28th. Inspector Connolly was going into the office when witness was going ont, and the former beckoned to him. On that occasion he spoke to the inspector with respect to lime. The only other inspector in the office was the accused. He had seen Inspector Kelly before, but did not know him, although he knew he was in charge of No. 9 district. Accused could speak a little Chinese. Witness knew this because sometimes the inspector spoke to him in Chinese; at other times he would speak through au interpreter. On the morning in question he was in the office about ten minutes. That was the only occasion on which he went to the office about that time. When he gave the accused the Christmas present on December 24th, he was lying on his bed in his own house. Witness managed eight of his father's latrines, and knew the sanitary bye-laws relating to latrines well. He obeyed those bye-laws, and his latrines were kept in good order. Accused from time to time used to tell him things which ought to be done to the latrines, and he used to do them. The inspector usually visited latrines between 7 and 8 a.m.
Witness inspected all his latrines once every two days. Each latrine-keeper kept a book, and witness wrote the amount received daily from each in the different books. The keepers did not always see him make the entries.
Mr. Slade-I suggest you that when you want a little money on your own account you put down an entry "paid inspector so much!"
Witness-It is my own business, and I can spend as much money as I like.
|
Mr. Slade-We have received no notice of this.
¡
[October 29, 1906.
His Lordship-Unless there is a regular form I don't think there is anything irregular.
Mr. Slade-Why should notice be allowed to pass in a criminal case which would not be accepted in a civil case?
His Lordship-I am not quite clear on that. Mr. Slade-I am entitled to disregard that notice entirely if they do not choose to do things properly.
The Attorney-General quoted from the case of the Attorney-General v. Le Marchant in the Term Reports, and said it had been determined that in a criminal prosecution you might give notice to the defendant to produce a paper in his possession, and in case he neglected to produce it other evidence could be called.
His Lordship decided to allow the evidence. A. S. Fraser, clerk in charge of the Hong. kong Savings Bank. said the extract produced Was a correct one of the account of Francis Ward. Witness copied the ex:ract from the bauk book, eatrie, of which were made by a
The Attorney-General-We gave you notice to produce your bank account.
His Lordship- You propose to call Mr. bank clerk, Fraser?
The Attorney-General-To produce the bank account of the prisoner.
His Lordship-Do you say notice has been
given
The Attorney-General-I gave them notice and it is evidence against the prisoner.
Mr. Slade The Crown have no right to put in any witness without giving notics to the other side.
His Lordship- I understand notice has been given.
Mr. Slade. No.
the
The Attorney-General-Listen to the notice read before you say that [reads]. If you don't produce the book I am entitled to call evidence.
Mr. Slade-Here in a criminal case Attorney-General requests the prisoner to pro- duce a document which has absolutely nothing to do with the matter at issue. He cannot compel him to produce anything whatsoeror.
The Attorney-General-As far as my stand- ing goes in what I have done, I would refer you to section 20 of the Evidenc› Act. Our Ordinance incorporates the special English enactment making bankers' books evidence in I will have to prove criminal and civil cases. that the book was at the time of making the Why did he doeatry, one of the ordinary books of the bank; that it was made in the ordinary course of business, and that it was in the control of the bank.
His Lordship then questioned wituess. When you found the accused in bed at 2 Chater Street, you say he called his "boy" and he acted as interpreter. that ?-I don't know.
Did he call him as if ho couldn't speak Chinese and was obliged to call him?-I don't know. Perhaps he looked as if he didn't like to speak Chinese..
Did he call him because he couldn't speak Chinese That I can't say.
Did he wait before calling the boy ?-Perhaps he was afraid if he spoke Chinese he might get stuck in the conversation and not be able to explain.
The case was adjourned.
Wednesday, October 24th.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE SIE FRANCIS PIGGort (Chief
JUSTICE).
THE CHARGES AGAINST INSPECTOR WARD.
The hearing of the charges of bribery and intimidation preferred against Sanitary In- spector Francis Ward, was continued.
The Attorney-General, instructed by Mr. F. B. L. Bowley, Crown Solicitor, prosecuted, and Mr. M. W. Blada, instructed by Mr. E. J. Grist (of Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist) appeared
for accused.
His Lordship-What book is it you want? The Attorney-General-His Savings Bank pass book.
His Lordship-I don't think there is any notice to produce in criminal proceedings, but you can call evidence if you like.
ia.
The Attorney-General--I will put the extract
Mr. Slade I object, my Lord; it has not been proved to be the account of the accused.
The Attorney-General (to witness) – Do you know Mr. Ward?
Witness-No.
Mr. Slade Then, I object. Nothing can be produced and put in as evidence against any body unless he is proved to be connected with it in some way.
а dozen There may be Francis Wards in the Colony.
His Lordship-When an account is opened is there no book in which a description of depositors is taken down?
Witness-No.
After farther argument Mr. Slade admitted that the extract from the accused's pass book
was correct.
Detective Sergeant Wett was then called and gave evidence as to serving a subpoena on Chan Pui at 2 Water Street, directing him to attend Witness at the Commission with his books. first took Chau Pai to the detective office, and then left him in charge of Chinese Sergeant 290. Chan Pai was taken to the detective office s0 that he could be shown the way to the Council Chambers where the Commission was sitting.
Cross-examined-After taking Chan Pui to the detective office witness did not know what became of him.
Mr. Slade thought he could save a lot of time by allowing the bank account to go in, as accused admitted the accuracy of it.
Lance Sergeant Chan Chik deposed to attending with Sergeant Watt on June 22nd at Chan Pai's house to serve a subpoena, whea he was taken to the detective office with his Witness then accompanied Chan Pui to the Colonial Secretary's office with his books, which were handed over to the chief clerk. Witness did not know his name, but said he looked like a chief olerk because he was a European.
The Attorney-General-That
books. was only a matter of courtesy. I am not bound to ask them to produce. There is no law to say you cannot call a witness, but it is a matter of comment that the Attorney-General should
ณ
call
witness who Was not examined before the Magistrate. It is not the law to say that because a witness was not called before the magistrate he could not be called by the prosecution without notice being given.
The Attorney-General quoted cases in support of his contention and stated that if an accused
person did not produce what he was ordered, they could call secondary evidence.
Mr. Slade- No one is disputing that, but you have not gone about it in the proper way.
His Lordship -You gave notice to produce the book?
do it, so I propose now to call the bank clerk.
The Attorney-General-Yes, and they wont
Mr. Slade You should have gone about it in the proper way.
His Lordship-I cannot shut out evidence if it is admissible.
Mr. Slade-If proper forms are not adopted, the Court shall refuse to allow evidence to be called.
The same jurors were again empanelled. Before the next witness was called Mr. Blade asked that the Court Interpreter be a literal translation of allowed to make the statement said to have been made
It read :- to Chan Pai by the accused. "You call son go away, I look after your latrines. Your son make what not go, eh? Up top yet not already ask arrived at. They ask when will reckon can meet contact. They Ask when ask you call your son go away. will day reckon on."
Mr. Slade-I don't. Notice to produce has The Attorney-General put in the Govern. ment Gazette of 11th May, 1906, stating that to be given, and notice at the same time has to it bore on page 759 the Commission issued be given that in default of producing documents by the Governor of Hongkong in Council. secondary evidence will be called to prove such In this connection he referred his Lordship | documents. That has not been done,
个
The Attorney-General-What have I done? Mr. Slade-You have not given proper notice. His Lordship-He calls on you to produce and
you don't produce. The question is whether you do produce?
Cross-examined-He did not take Chan Pui direct to the Colonial Secretary's office because he was instructed to take him to the Central Police Station.
This olosed the case for the Crown.
His Lordship-As you have closed your case there is one thing I want to call your attention to. There is no evidence of misfeasance by the defendant in connection with his duties. The Crown has produced no evidence that the work has been badly done in consequence of the alleged bribes, nor has any evidence been called that the Sanitary Board is dissatisfied with the way the work was done; therefore we must assume that the work was well done.
The Attorney-General-We must assume that the bribe, if taken, did not produce the result for which it was intended. I submit to your Lordship that it does not make it any the less an offence to accept a bribe if you fool the person who tribes yon, and it amounts to this: you are doing a doubly immoral act if it can be considered immoral to take advantage of a person who endeavours to bribe you. That cannot affect the jury's view of the case, and I submit it is immaterial to the issue.
Mr. Slade, in opening the defence, submitted that the Crown had failed to make up a case. down that The Bribery Ordinance laid
it was an offence to give any sum of money
■ public officer, or for a public
to
1
1
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.