October 5, 1907.1
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
219
this rather funny, but told the man to go he had. He knew the number of the prisoner's ) counter, and in case of married couples. it waS sway and come back in office hours Accused left, but returned at four in the afternoon and to look for his luggage. Witness was in the office
room because he (the prisoner) came downstairs only necessary for one party to sign. removed the trunk. Ha engaged two coolies at that time. There was no special reason to take it to the bamboo wharf known Murray Pier, and was identified by one of❘tion, but he often mw people register.
as why be should have seen this particular registra. these coolies. Arrived there ha told
a sampan, ani told the He told them
He
the coolies to put the box on and scoused went with it, people aboard where to row. to row down to Causeway Bay and put it on a four masted steamer which was there. This turned out to be the Monteagle. The boatman identified the accused, picking him out from eleven other men without hesitation. When the Monteagle was reached he went on board, and was met by the quartermaster. asked the quartermaster to put the trunk in the hold, saying he would return on board later as a passenger. The quartermaster was unable to put the trunk in the hold as it was passengers' luggage, so he put it in a place kept for such luggage. On the 7th, the third day after the trunk was put on board, the people on the ship noticed a bad smell, and tried to find what was the cause of it. Eventually they traced it to the trunk put on board by the socused. opened it, and found the dead body of an adult female. The police were at once sent for, and Sergeant Watt went aboard and had the body removed to the mortuary at Kowloon. The body was taken out of the b 1, and medical evidence would show that it had been packed tightly in it. The head was hanging down, the thighs were flexed, and the body was pushed down tight. It took some force to remove it from the box, and when it WEB removed it was found that around the throat was the band of a 1-dy's dress tied in a tight knot, which was twisted with the handle of a hair brush. The handle was still in the band and sticking up, with the brush almost in front of the throat. The body was so decomposed that it was almost impossible to say what had exactly cansed death, but the doctor would say that the tight- ening of the band would have caused death. Ho had examined the body care- fully, externally and internally, and could find no other reason for the death. Next accused was identified as having pawned here with a pawnbroker two diamonds. Among the jewellery of the victim there was a ring which one of the witnesses would say, who knew her well, had two diamonds in it. Most of the jewellery belonging to the deceased had been recovered, but that ring had not. police then endeavoured to find the culprit. They got a very good description of him and wired to all the coast ports, and eventually the accused was arrested at Chefoo, and upon him there was found a quantity of jewellery and property which has since been identified as belonging to the deceased. From Chefoo he was sent by the cruiser Galveston to Manila, There he was set free and at once rearrested by the Manila police and held for extradition. Police officers' evidence and documents were sent there, he was extradited, and now stood before the Court. Up till the time the police realised who it was they were looking for, the body had not been identified, but a woman from Manila came up who knew the deceased, and the body which had then been buried at the Colonial Cemetery was exhumed and taken into the mortuary. There the woman identified the body as that of Gertrude Dayton by the hands, certain gold filled teeth and the general conformation of the body. Since the prisoner
The
had been here three identifications were held in the jail, when all the witnesses were given an opportabity to recognise him. No less than twelve witnesses for the prosecution identified the man, Mr. Morrell e ncluded by saying he would call witnesses to prove the whole story as he had opened.
J. H. Oxberry was the first. He said he was a runner employed by the Hongkong Hotel Co. He remembered the 7.8. Eastern arriving on August 3rd, and brought some passeR- gers off that vessel. There was a Mr. Ross and a Mr. and Mrs, W. B. Jones. The man in the dook was the same Mr. W. H. Jones. He had a lady with him that day. Witnes took them both off to the Hotel and they took a room there room. No. 181, fifth floor.
Cross-examined-Mr. Ross also put up at the hobel, but, witness could not my which room
|
How do you know that this man called Ross was named Ross ?-He registered under that
name.
Have you seen the prisoner here before?—I saw him when he came here last year.
What did he come up for ?—He went to the Baltimore Hotel on that occasion, and the proprietor of that hotel told me he came up to get a firht on.
And you know nothing about the departure of the secured from the hotel ?—No, nothing.
Mr. Harding here suggested that the Chinese witnesses ought to be called first, as if they
in the meantime, were not, they would be speaking about the case
Mr. Morrell-I submit am entitled to conduct my case in my own way, and take the witnesses in chronological order.
His Worship -They English, can they?
cannot
understand
Mr. Morrell-Even if they do I am entitled to call my witnesses in chronological order. I never heard a solicitor raise such a point before, His Worship-I don't know that it makes much difference.
The witnesses were call-d Solicitor daxired.
as the Crown
A. R. Soonderam, a counter clerk in the
|
|
employ of the Hongkong Hotel Co.. said that hetween 2 and 3 p.m. on 4th 'ugust Mr. W. H. Jones registered his name on the Hongkong Hotel registry and asked for the loan of 810, Wit ness lent him the mount. The man in question was in the dock. When he signed a chit witness took it and compared it with the register. The signatures tallied, so he lent the money. When he received this he asked witness to get him two coolies to carry a sample case to a certain firm. He did not mention the name of the firm. The ohit (produced) was the one he signed. Witness gave orders to the hall porter about outside coolies, and he got two. Witness asked pre- | soner where he wanted the sample the to, so that he could explain in Chinese to
Phente porter to tell the coolies where to go. Pri- soner replied that he was going out together with the coolies, Wituess did not notice the sample case.
-^ni^
Cross-examined Witness was empowered
loan to give
not exceeding 8'0 to accused asked him to get outside coolies. boarders at the Hotel. He was quite sure Hotel coolies only carried boarders luggage
to the launch.
He did not know what
luggage accused took from the hotel, and after
to
be had left witness made no inquiries as whether he had taken away any more of his luggage. He did not see the accused return to bad the hotel. Before that afternoon witness identified him at Manila.
not SOAN the prisoner, but he
R. Soonderam, another counter clerk at the Hongkong Hotel, remembered on August 3rd A gentleman calling at the Hotel and registering. This was between 1 and 12 noon. He came off the ss. Eastern. There was no one with him when witness sw the accused, who signed in the visitors book “Mr. and Mrs. W. H. Jones" Witness assigned him room No. 184, but he would not take it, saying the prios was too high. The manager reduced the price to $12 a day for two persons. Accused then took it, and witness rang the bell for the hall porter to take him up. [The hotel register was produced, and witness pointed out the name written by accused. The entry was marked and the pages sealed]. Witness could not identify the man at the jail as Mr. W. H. Jones. He picked out an other men.
Cross-examined-How do you know that the man arrived by the Fastern? - Because the runner entered it in the launch book.
You've told us W. H. Jones baggied about the price and eventually it was reduced to $12? |
Yes.
Was the manager there ?—He was near, but did not see Mr. Jones, being behind a board containing the visitors' names.
Re-examined—While witness was on duty the only people who went to the Hotel were taken there by Oxberry. The visitors' book was on the
May Hempstead was the next witnews. She said she was a married woman. residing at 52, Hollywood Roid. She knew Gertrude Dayton, and saw her on August 3rd last about 10 or 10.30 p.m. in her house. Gertrude. D1ytou went to see her to borrow some money. She was accompanied by a man she intro- duced as Jones, but said that was not his proper name. She could not identify Jones' but he impressed her as being young and fair. She thought the prisoner was Jones. Witness had known Gertrude Dayton for many years. The pair stayed in her house from an hour and a half to two hours. While there they drank nine pints of champagne. Witness, Miss Dayton and the man she was with were drinking. When a bolt's of wine is ordered it is
not often completely drank, (Witness produced one of the glasses used) and mid when the boy took round. the wine he never filled a glass up unless specially requested. He usually filled the glass about half way up, and no more was taken out of the bottle unless specially asked for. Gerty Dayton signed a chit for nine bottles of wine. Witness had not the chit. She tore it up after hearing of the murder because she did not want t› be mixed up in the affair. When Gertrude Dayton tried to borrow money, she offered Post Office Orders as security. The man with her had them in his pocket, and she asked him to ha d them to her. Witness did not take them in her
hand, but recognised them as Post Office Orders. When Gertrude Dayton entered the house she told witness she was getting tipsy, Witness did not notice whether the man wa", but both visitors walked out all right. Gertrude Dayton, had rings on her fingers but witness could not say how many.
Cross-examined-Witness did not know tha vains of the notes Gertrude Dayton produced.
for the wine in your house?
Mr. Harding-What amount did you charge
Mr. Morrell-I object to the question. Mr. Harding-gold like to address your Worship on tu by to
The link the witness should be warned not to answer the question.
Mr. Harding-It is laid down perfectly clearly in Archibald's Criminal Proceedings that in inoriminating questions objection mast first be taken by the witness. Counsel on the opposite side cannot argue the question. It is laid down in two cases, and I must object, to my friend making any comment at all on it
Mr. Morrell-How many other cases are against it?
Mr. Harding-Will your Worship allow me to put the question?
His Worship What for?
Mr. Harding—Just to test the veracity of the witness. It is a link in the evidence, and if a link breaks the hole chain falls.
Mr. Morrell-No witness is bound to inerim- inate hims⚫lf or herself.
Mr. Harding-I want to take her through the interview at her house piecemeal.
Mr. Morrell-She said a chit was signed and had been destroyed, and I submit my friend has no right to go any further
Mr. Harding--I would like to know what your Worship's ruling is,
Harding. I am afraid you must; but it is not His Worship-If you insist upon it, Mr.
a fair question.
alter your view when I tell you. The deceased Mr. Harding-Your Worship may perhaps
instead of bringing out a lot of notes. had rings, and surely a ring would be saffl dent
Witness-No. She wanted money to p her bills here.
Mr. Harding-That has not been given in evidence.
Mr. Morrell-Well, you've got it now, anyway I think the witness should be warned in wi fairness that she neeì not answer the question, Mr. Harding-That is not the Court's duży, His Worship-I cannot prevent the question bing asked.
Mr. Morrell - Baț the mistress can refus is answer it.
M». Harding again put the question. Witnovan--Must I answer?
His Worship-No, you need not answer, Mr. Harding asked his Worship to maks.
note of the fact
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.