....
was his note book. On the face of them they were the ordinary books of a regular bill dis- counter. There was the profit or loss of each wet of tranmotions totalled up at the bottom of each account. There was no evidence that the Wang Fung carried on the business of bill discounters. There was evidence that they raised money by the sale of bills in the way described by Ma Fai Ting, but the books show ing these transactions would be quite different from the books produced, and he was satisfied that on the face of them they were not the books of the Wang Fung, but of some other firm. The item in No. 2 book relating to a transaction in yarn was of itself almost sufficient to warrant their rejection. He always strained a point not to reject tooks of account which it was the policy of the Evidence Ordinance to make evidence, but he was perfectly certain that if these books were examined by an accountant and compared with the balance sheets it would be found that they had nothing whatever to do | with the Wang Fung, except the Wang Fung Canton account itself, which showed pretty plainly that they were the books of some other firm, apparently the Lai Hing, and that the Wang Fung had an secount with that firm. The facts failing to establish the case which, as he had said, might possibly have been established in law, judgment would be for the plaintiffs
with costs.
Mr. Pollock asked in view of the large amount at stake for a stay of execution for three months in order that the Bank might consider their position.
Mr. Blade objected to the stay of execution. The plaintiff had obtained judgment and was entitled to the benefit of that judgment. The Bank bad instituted proceedings in China and the possession of the deeds was natural ly of great value. If defendants would give ao undertaking to abandon those proceedings-
Mr. Pollock said he could not consent to that, but he would give an undertaking that the matter remain in statu quo.
Mr. Slade was dissatisfied with that. His Lordship pointed out that the ordinary proceeding was to apply to the Fall Court.
Mr. Pollock agreed, but pointed to the pos- sibility of the deeds going out of the colony, as the plaintiff was resident in China.
His Lordships-They might remain with the solicitors.
Mr. Slade. They are so valuable the solicitor does not wish them to remain with him.
Mr. Pollock-They might remain with the bank,
We don't
Mr. Slade-We don't trust you. know that you will not use them against us He added that the Bank could bring great pressure to bear diplomatically in China, and that he could not consent to the deeds remaning with the bank.
After discussion it was decided that the deeds be deposited in a neutral bank, the Chartered Bank, and that if the plaintiff required them he could make application in chambers to the judge.
Judgment was formally entered for the plaintiff.
Monday, 21st September.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
Birorr Ma. H. H. J. GOMPERTZ (ACTING PUISNE JUDG■),
ALLEGED FALSE DECLARATION.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
|
|
}
|
[September 28, 1908
this case, that it was somewhat complicated. ↑ them to stop, the demand baing accompanied
a revolver shot. Li Ng and the rest of his crew. But when all the facts were laid before [them it would be perfectly simple, and the issue they becsme larmed, and fed to the hold of the would have to decide was a simple one. The junk. Then the boat ran alongside and several case arose out of the disputed ownership of a men boarded the junk and possessed theri- small house near Shaukiwan. It was built selves of all the valuables on board, going to strip two men, of all their by a quarryman (now deceased) named Lai so far s Leung about 15 years ago. He lived in it with clothing After a while two of the robbers went back to their own boat, the rest remaining his wife until his death in June 1905. The day before his death he obtained a Crown lease on the jak. They then proceeded to mil both of the site of the house. Deceased left a widow, the junk and their own boat to the village of who was the prosecutrix in this case. At his Tailong the owner of the junk and the coca- death no administration or probate was granted pants during all this time being fastened down in respect of this property; apparently the in the bold. On arrival at Tallong_two_boats parties were poor, and no steps were taken to put off from the shore, and the junk was cleared secure administration. The widow of deceased of all ita cargo, which consisted of kerosene and left Hongkong for a time after her husband's flour. Then the robbers cut the sails of the death, and the house in question was then taken jank before departing, so as to prevent her being care of by the husband of the defendant. Two sailed. The junk was then taken to Leang. years later prosecutrix returned to the Colony shanwad by her crew, and prosecutor landed and and lived in part of the house which, during her gave information to the polics, The question absence, had been divided into two parts, Defend. in this has would be one of identification. The ant lived in the other part. In the spring of fourth defendant played the part of Good Samari- the present year the land bailiff discovered that tao, taking the orew of the jauk food and water while on board, and as a result he had been part of the house was an spor achment ou Crown land, an I gave the widow notice to move identified by two of the orew. The second it. Then the widow went to defendant and | defendant was also identified, while part of the asked her to give up possession of her part of atolen property was found in the possession of the house. The defendant at first refused, but the other two. Where a man was found in was afterwards persuaded to dojso by prosecutrix possession of stolen property, assuming the theft and probably by the influence brought to bear to have been proved, the law required that he by the Inspector of Police at Shaukiwan. As should give a reasonable account of how he soon as defendant left, prosecutrix let the house became possessed of that property, otherwise he would be held liable. There was a general to another woman, and shortly afterwards a summons was issued by the magistrate, on the denial by all the prisoners, but the case for the application of a man named Lai Leang, to eject prosecution was that two had been identified, the occupier of the house, Prosecutrix instituted while all were found together in the inquiries and found that this man had obtained matshed, where certain of the stolen property a grant of administration from the Supreme was discovered. Court to the estate of deceased, alleging that he was the next of kin, and that he had regis tered the grant of property in his name at the Land Office. It was necessary that there should be Bu affidavit of identity filed be- fore administration
granted, and the defendant, it appeared, identified this man and corroborated his petition by mɩking a declaration before the Commissioner for Oaths to the effect that he was Lai Leung, and that be was the younger brother of deceased. Prosecutrix alleged that the petitioner was no relation whatever to her deceased husband, who never had a brother. The practical effect of this crime was to deprive prosecutrix of her property. The osse was an important one. because although the property in question was small, there was a serious question involved. It was therefore the duty of the Crown taka up this case to protect the public against frauds of this description.
wad
When evidence had been heard his Lordship directed the jury to find a verdict of not gailty, as there was not sufficient evidence to convict.
The jury returned a verdict accordingly, and the prisoner was dischargod.
The Sessions were adjourned.
Tuesday, September 22nd.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE MR. H. H. J. GOMPEETZ (ÁCTING PUISNE JUDGE).
ALLEGED PIRACY.
Li Bik and three other natives were arraigned on charges of robbery and receiving stolen Lau Kin was indicted on the obarge of goods. Prisoners pleaded not guilty on both making a false declaration at the Supreme counts, and the following jury was empanelled: Court on May 16th. Prisoner pleaded not-J. H. Underwood (foreman), A. McDougall, guilty, and the following jurors were called :- A. W. Wardigan, V. A. de Paolo Callaco, 8. P. B. Wolfe (foreman), K. Laurens, F. 8. A. Nevill, O. Ď. Barretto and 8. Masso. Allen, G. A. Caldwell, B. O. Walker, A. E. Asger and D. W; Towne,
The Attorney General (Hon, Mr. Bees Davies K. C.) instructed by Mr. Dennys, of the The Hon. Mr. Rees Davies, K.C., Attorney-Crown Solicitor's office, prosecuted, and prison. General, instructed by Mr. F. B. L. Bowley, | era wers undefended. Crown Solicitor, prosecuted, and prisoner was not defended.
The Attorney-General stated that this was a oase of making a false declaration before the Commissioner for Oaths in the register of the Supreme Court in a matter affecting probate, The indictment în perjury cases was always rather elaborate, and Counsel expected that the gentlemen of the jury would probably think, | when he had related the facta connected with
The Attorney General stated that this was a case of piracy. The robbery took place on a jank owned by a man named Li Ng on August 6th at Tailong in the waters of the Colony. On that day Li Ng left in his trading junk with five other men for the purpose of going to Pingboi. On the same night, about nine o'clock, having arrived at the entrance to Tailong Bay, a bost put off from the shore and those on board the trader heard voices telling
i
me
When the case for the Crown had closed defendants availed themselves of the opportunity to make statemente in the witness stand.
The first denied taking part in the armed robbery. His was only a two-oared boat, and aofit for such a purpose.
He had been suffer- ing from sore legs for some time, and after he was arrested he was in hospital with them. He did not know his boat had been taken It by the police until told by his wife, was broken and could not be used.
Ia cross-examination defendant ssid he know only the third defendant He was not in the matabed with the others on August 20th. The four and oil were brought by a relation of his, and were put in the other matshed prior to being shipped away.
And the goods were yours, and the other men hat nothing to do with them ?—No, they were mine.
The second defendant said he was a coolie emplored in Messrs. Butterfild and Swire's He knew nothing about this matter. docks He was a day labourer getting 3) conta a day.
The third defendant declared that the police inspector, the sergeant and the Hoklos were falsely accusing him. He was a business man and an a fresh fish bost. He was sleeping when the polios arrived, but the firing of a shot woke him up and he went out to see what was the matter. Seeing a Chiness detective chasing someone up the hill he asked what was the pistlar,
When the detective heard him speak be gave up the chase and arrested witness. Sergeant Wilden struck him on the back and arms with a stick, and kicked him in the back. Then the polios searched his house, bat found nothing. After this they took him to another matahed, and looking at him with a light said he was a robber. This was not so, He as falsely accused. His proper matshed was blown down in the typhoon, so he was living in the matahed visited by the police. His people had besa living for three generations in Tytamtak
The fourth dafendant made no statement,
After evidence for the defence had been heard, an ↑ his Lordship had rummed up, the jury retired, returning twelve minutes later. On the first count they found the first and third prischers not guillty, and the second and fourth On the second count they found all guile. the prisoners guilty.
H Lordship sentenced the second and fourth prisoners to five years' hard labour the rsi count, and three years on the court sentences to run concurrently. and third defendanta wars mok three years' hard labour on the missed
!
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.