510
A DISPUTED MAGISTERIAL
RULING.
STRONG PROTEST BY THE CROWN SOLICITOR.
The case in which Lam Fuk Chiu is charged with obtaining the sum of $24,000 from Mr. John Hastings by false pretences was again called in Mr. Wood's Court at the Magistracy yesterday, when Mr. W. E. L. Shenton (of Messrs. Deacon, Looker and Deacon) appeared to apply for the discharge of the defendant. Mr. F. B. L. Bowley, Crown Solicitor, represented the Crown.
Mr. Bowley informed the Court that there appeared to be a certain amount of misunder- standing in the case, and he believed that Sergeant Grant brought the man before the Court on the previous morning. The speaker should have been communicated with before the man appeared before his Worship, and then he would have attended. But he was not com- municated with, and knew nothing about the case until late on Wednesday afternoon. Mr. Shenton acted under a mistaken view of the position in communicating with Messrs. Hastings and Hastings.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
tien on behalf of the Crown, but certainly the informant or complainant must appear.
His Worship Mr. Hastings is not before
me now.
Mr. Shenton--Not now.
His Worship-Therefore, Mr. Hastings' ab- sence does not affect the matter.
Mr. Shenton-But the record must be altered. His Worship-The question is, what altera- tion am I to make ? Mr. Bowley suggests that the alteration should be the King, represent- ed by the Crown Solicitor.
News
[December 11, 1909.
A FULL COURT DECISION REVERSED.
News has reached the Colony that the Privy Council has reversed the decision of the Hongkong Full Court, consisting of His. Hon. Sir Francis Piggott (Chief Justice) and His Hon. Mr. H. H. J. Gompertz (Paisne Judge), in the action between the Russo-Chinese Bank and Li Yau Sam.
The plaintiff Bank sought to reverse the decision of His Hon. the Chief Justice on the ground that he had misdirected the jury.
Mr Bowley-I don't suggest anything of the sort. The section my friend read does not
The plaintiff in the original action, Li Yau refer to indictable proceedings at all. It must Sam v. the Russo-Chinese Bank, gave 30,000 be read in a reasonable way, and it would be taels to the compradore of the defendant bank utterly unreasonable for your Worship to read for telegraphic transfer to Shanghai, and the this provision about the complainant not ap-compradore, instead of handing the money pearing in cases where the Crown prosecutes. to the bank, converted it to his own use. I think the correct way of reading it is that the Plaintiff sought to recover from the bank, but Crown is complainant, but if your Worship will the latter denied that it had any knowl dge of strike out the name of Mr. Hastings. I do not the claim, and contended that the transaction mind whose name you insert. I appear as was between the plaintiff and the compradore. attorney for the King, not as complainant or informant.
,
His Worship-The point is whether it is regular for the King to appear.
Mr. Sheuton - The King never does demean himself to prosecute his own subjects,
Mr. Bowley-He is always represented by his
His Worship-I asked him to. Mr. Bowley Your Worship did not under-attorney. I submit these objectious are stand the position. The fault lay in the police
not communicating with me.
His Worship-You are representing Mr. Hastings in this prosecution?
Mr. Bowley-No, I am representing the King.
His Worship-I will put your name in place of Mr. Hastings on the record.
moonshine and perfectly frivolous, and in order to save time you can enter anyone you like as complainant.
}
His Worship-I will enter your name as complainant.
Mr. Bowley - As your Worship pleases. His Worship-I will amend the record by substituting Mr. Bowley's name.
Mr. Bowley The Crown Solicitor, if your Worship pleases.
Mr. Bowley-The King is prosecutor, and I appear as his attorney. The fact that Mr. John Hastings' name is on the record is His Worship Your personal name. due to the accidental fact that Mr. John Mr. Bowley-No, your Worship. I appear Hastings in the first instance swore the as Crown Solicitor, not as Mr. Bowley. The information on which the warrant was issued.information should be in the same way as it is Having laid the information and brought given at the Supreme Court, The Court is the matter before the Court, he has nothing informed by the Attorney-General on behalf of further to do with the proceedings if those our Sovereign Lord the King," and should not proceedings are adopted by the Crown, as they contain a personal name. have been in this case. As your Worship knows very well, a warrant may be issued on the in- formation of any person. This is an indictable offence, and a very serious offence, with which the defendant is charged, and the informant is not the prosecutor.
His Worship-Mr. Hastings is the inform- ant?
Mr. Bowley-Yes.
His Worship-The question I want to get at is, who is the prosecutor?
Mr. Bowley-The King, your Worship, and I represent him. The Crown can intervene in any prosecution being conducted by a private person and adopt it. I submit that these proceedings are perfectly regular. The man is before your Worship, and I ask you to remand him to gaol for a reasonable time, subject to any application being made for bail.
His Worship asked if Mr. Davidson (who was present) was representing Mr. Hastings.
Mr. Bowley said Mr. Davidson was one of the most important witnesses in the case. The question arose out of a forged mortgage, and a large number of persons were implicated. As it happened, the forged mortgage was put through by Messrs. Hastings and Hastings, and Mr. Davidson was the solicitor who attended to the completion of it. He submitted that Mr. John Hastings was not entitled to be represented in the matter now, as he (the Crown Solicitor) had taken it over. Mr. Hastings was only entitled to engage any qualified person to watch the proceedings on his behalf, and Mr. Davidson, he took it, was present for that purpose.
His Worship I understand Mr. Hastings' is not represented here?
Mr. Bowley No. Mr. Shenton-This was a private prosecution by Mr. John Hastings.
His Worship That is always done at the Police Court.
Mr. Bowley-In the course of my experience at the Police Court, which extends over a cou siderable period, I have never seen the name of the Crown Solicitor appearing.
His Worship-Whoever prosecutes, pro- secutes in a personal capacity.
Mr. Bowley-I prosecute in my official capacity. His Worship-The difficulty is that the King is not appeared by anybody.
Mr. Bowley-He is appeared by himself, if your Worship pleases.
Mr. Shenton-The section says that the informant or complainant must appear before the Court.
His Worship-Section 14 (2) clearly gives. me power to put this man back in jail.
Mr. Shenton - Only temporarily.. His Worship I am not clear on the point whether the prosecutor must appear or not.
Mr. Bowley-I ask your Worship to remand the prisoner, and in due course to take the evidence I tender on behalf of the King. I demand that as a right, and I submit that the Crown is entitled to a little consideration in these matters.
morrow.
His Worship—I will hear the application to- What time will suit you, Mr. Bowley? Mr. Bowley-No time to-morrow. I am engaged all day.
His Worship-I will remand this application until 11. 30 to-morrow morning.
Mr. Bowley-What application ? ·
His Worship-To consider the discharge of the man on the ground that the King is not appearing or represented in his own name, or that the prosecutor is not appearing.
Mr. Bowley-I might inform your Worship that I protest against these proceedings Mr. Bowley-I don't admit anything of the absolutely and entirely, and shall take what sort. This prosecution was instituted by the steps I may be advised by the Attorney. police under the directions of the Government. General to alter the proceedings and to apply Mr. Shenton drew his Worship's attention for a mandamus to order this Court to conduct to Ordinance No. 3 of 1890, section 14, sub-the proceedings in accordance with the law section 2, and contended that the complainant or informant must appear. Unless he did, his Worship must dismiss the charge. It was perfectly open to Mr. Bowley to lay an informs-
Mr. Shenton-I would ask if your Worship
will consider bail?
His Worship-Not at this stage. The hearing was adjourned.
|
Hon. Mr. H. E. Pollock, K.C., instructed by Mr. H. J. Gedge (of Messrs. Johnson, Stokes and Master) represented the appellants, while Mr. M. W. Slade, instructed by Mr. C. E. H. Beavis (of Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist) was. the counsel for the respondents.
ALLEGED LARCENY OF A RING.
"
Before Mr. J. R. Wood at the Magistracy on the 6th inst. a Chinese named Mok Mau Sik was proceeded a ainst on a charge of stealing a diamond ring.
Mr. M. Reader Harris (of Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist) prosecuted, and Mr. P. W. Goldring (of Messrs. Goldring, Barlow and Morrell) ap- peared for the defendant.
Mr.arris told the Court that on August 30th complainant gave the ring in question, which was valued at $600, to his sister, and asked her to try to find a purchaser On Sep- tember 9th she handed the ring to the defendant, who told her he had a friend who would prob- ably buy it. Some days later when complain. ant asked for the return of the ring he was told that it was in pawn, and the defendant asked to be given time to redeem it.
Mr. Goldring asked to be shown the informa- tion on which the defendant was arrested.
!
His Worship declined to produce this. Mr. Goldring asked his Worship under what Ordinance he refused, and further wished to know why there was a discrepancy between the warrant and the evidence. He submitted that the defendant was entitled to see the information.
His Worship said he was entitled to see the warrant, but not the information.
Evidence was then called, and the hearing adjourned.
A FATAL LEAP.
When Sergeant Kendall, in charge of a posse of police, executed a gambling warrant at No. 17, Moon Street, second floor, on Wednesday night, the gamblers took fright, and one of fourteen men, in order to escape the police, jumped over the verandah. On landing on the ground beneath he fell back on his head, and received, such injuries as to cause almost im- mediate death. The other thirteen men ar- rested were charged before Mr. E. R. Hallifax at the Magistracy yesterday, and the two keepers of the game were fined $50 each, and each of the players was mulcted in the sum of $3.
BUILDING COLLAPSE.
'LADIES' NARROW ESCAPE.
Mrs. and Miss Schmidt, who reside on the second floor of No. 5. Beaconsfield. Arcade, ha a narrow escape from a violent death yesterday morning through the roof of their bedroom collapsing. Two large beams, which are said to have been badly damaged by white ants, collapsed at the eastern side of the ceiling, and it was owing to the fact that the ladies' bed was on the western side of the room that they escaped serious injury and probable death The beams fell in such a manner as to act as a shield to the sleepers; and thus they were secure from the falling debris. Neighbours hastened to their assistance and the ladies were extricated considerably frightened, but unharmed.
Page 10Page 11
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.