528
difference in the cross-examination of the witness if the speaker was allowed to have the statement made to the Captain Superintendent of Police before him. He asked his Worship to adjourn the case for fuller consideration of the law, or if he pleased to continue, to reserve his decision on the point.
His Worship-Very good, Mr. Gedge, you can omit this question to-day.
The cross-examination of the witness was continued:
When you left the sampan, did you take particular notice of the men who accompanied you on to the Cyclops P-I took notice of the man who was left behind.
Did you tell the excise officers in the sampan that you were going to see the Captain of the ship?--I told them I was going to see the officer.
k
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
Who did you see on board first ?-The | quartermaster.
Did you ask him where the captain was?-I asked him where the chief officer was, and he took me to the officer's room, but the chief officer was not there.
Where did you find him ?—I did not find him till the fight took place in the tallymen's quarters.
Did you see an excise officer arrest a man on the deck P-No.
Do you know if such a thing took place ?- No.
Did the chief officer remonstrate with you as to the way the tallymen were being treated ?- No.
Did not he tell you that they were being very cruelly treated ?—I can't remember.
Did you give him back a short answer? to my knowledge.
Not
Did you say to him that if he did not look out you would lock him up?
Mr. Shenton-That is not in dispute. His Worship-I don't think you can cross- examine outside your own prosecution.
Mr. Gedge-I submit I can. You can ask any conceivable question in cross-examination.
Mr Sbenton-My friend did not seem to think so when I was cress-examining his witnesses. Mr. Gedge-This curtailment of cross-examin- ation has never happened before. (To the witness)-Did you say you would lock him up P-No.
Do you mean to tell me he did not re- monstrate with you as to the way the men were being treated ?-Both the captain and chief officer spoke about the men being held by their queues. They said something about it being a funny way to take men off a ship
Now, come, didn't they say that the men were being cruelly held by their queues ? They remarked on the cruel way in which the men's queues were held.
Were the captain and chief officer talking with you at the same time? Not at the same time, but one after the other.
Did the captain not ask you by what authori- ty this queer treatment was going on ?—I can't remember the exact words.
Now perhaps you can remember telling the captain to read his port regulations ?—Yes.
And that the captain or one of his sixty coolies would tell you who you were, is that right ?When the captain disputed my authority and said that anyone could wear this uniform, I told him that anyone of the coolies about would know better than that.
Do you really say that the master of a ship thought a sergeant in uniform had not any authority?--This captain attributed no authority to a sergeant in uniform.
-
You say you did not push the captain aside ? No, there was no occasion. In that case I
should have arrested him.
What would you have arrested him for?— Obstruction.
:
You don't allege, do you, that the captain in any way obstructed you?-His demeanour practically amounted to obstruction.
Does that apply to Mr. Fittes, the chief officer, as well ?Yes, and to Captain Aitken.
What did Captain Aitken say?-He told the captain I had no authority to board his ship, and that he would see about it later on
|
his ship, that my uniform was nothing to go by, as anyone could wear a uniform, and that I had no right to agrest these four men.
Do you mean to tell me that the captain really insinuated that you were masquerading in police uniform? -According to the words he used.
When Captain Aitken reached the top of the gangway didn't he ask you if you were going to stop this brutality P-Not to my knowledge.
Didn't you tell him in reply that if he interfered it would be at his peril P-I don't remember.
In the cabin did you see the third defendant hit the third complainant on the face P-No, he was too weak to hit anyone.
Have you made a statement in writing to the solicitor for the defence?
Mr. Shenton objected.
Mr. Gedge-Your Worship won't let me have an answer ?
His Worship -No.
Mr. Gedge-Then I would ask your Worship to order the production of the statement made to the Captain Superintendent of Police, and the statement made to the solicitor for the defence.
¿
His Worship--We have not got it that there any such report made to the Captain Superintendent of Police.
was
Mr. Gedge-Because your Worship won't allow the question to be answered?
His Worship,-No, exactly. The further hearing was adjourned.
Tuesday, 14th December.
Mr. Shenton said he had had an opportunity of seeing the statement made by Sergeant Wil- son to Captain Badeley, and he had seen Capt. Badeley, who had no objection to the document being produced.
His Worship (Mr. Hallifax)- Then you withdraw your objection to it going in ?
Mr. Shenton-Yes.
Mr. Gedge added that he had called for it, and he was entitled to have inspection of the document and cross-examine upon it.
Discussion then took place as to whether the document should be put in.
Mr. Gedge said he wished to cross-examine Sergt. Wilson upon the document.
Mr. Shenton contended that it must go in and be read.
Mr. Gedge differed. If he put it in he made it part of his case.
His Worship thought the document must go in if Mr. Gedge wished to contradict the wit ness' statement by what he had written.
[December 20, 1909, harbour and search for opium, and should he find anyone in possession of opium he was entitled to arrest that man and convey him to the Police Station. It was unnecessary for such an officer to ask the permission of the captain, and there was no authority given to the captain to interfere in any way. He did not think they need go into the question of excise officers being required to wear their badges. The police sergeant was in uniform, and the badges. Mr. Shën- excisemen wore their ton then dealt with discrepancies, in the evidence for the prosecution, and criticised the action of Captain Harris in interfer ing with the excise officers on board his vessel. He wished to draw attention to the conduct of Captain Harris, who deliberately insulted the police sergeant, telling him that his uniform went for nothing. Naturally the sergeant referred him to the police regulations and told him any one of the sixty coolies on board could tell him better than that. The impression he gave was that the police sergeant was masquerading in police uniform. He asked his Worship if that was proper conduct for a man who was given the command of a ship like the Cyclops. Mr. Shenton then commented on the fact that the summonses against the de- fendants were not isssued until three months after the affair took place. With regard to the identification the police made the necessary preparations
His Worship-I don't think it is necessary to labour this question of identification. think the means provided were sufficient for identification.
Mr. Shenton-I want to point out that nine men were produced by the prosecution and all were on board the Cyclops on the date mention- ed. By a coincidence they picked out one man who was not on the boat at all.
1
Mr. Gedge-So you say, His Worship-Too much has been said of the identification.
Mr. Shenton-I think it is a subject for serious comment, because it did not give the defendants a fair chance.
Mr. Gedge, in submitting the case for the prosecution, said he would prove that there had been brutality by those four excise officers Chinese towards the tallymen on the Cyclops; brutality against Chinese. They did not charge All the European the Europeans with it. sergeant did was to look on. What they said was that there had been brutality in the arrest of those four men. Proceeding, he said that any man-black or white or yellow-would naturally object to his castle being broken into with ut rhyme or reason, and that was what took place in that instance. None of those men, he submitted, wore badges. The Chinaman was the
notorious casual being, and in this instance he had forgotten his badge. Conse- quently there was a row and a fight when the In conclusion, he quarters were searched. submitted that the police should have conducted the identification in the ordinary proper way. His Worship-If you have any complaints you must make them to another quarter.
Mr Gedge said he did not know whether the questions he wished to put would be contra- dictory or explanatory.
Mr. Shenton then said he would waive his
not mind He did.
if objections. questions were put to the witness without the report being read.
Mr. Gedge then questioned witness, who said at the time he wrote his report he did not know the names of the men whom he said had been assaulted. He knew they were excise officers. names afterwards in the He learned their charge-room.
Mr. Gedge said his friend had not acted fairly in putting in that document which his Worship had read.
3
His Worship replied that the Court could call for any document.
Mr. Shenton suggested that he should prove that a copy of the port regulations was handed to the captain.
His Worship said it was unnecessary. This concluded the case.
Mr. Shenton then addressed the Court. The four defendants stood charged that they as excise officers did commit an assault on the 11th August upon the four complainants. At the outset he indicated that the burden of proof devolved upon his friend, who had to do more than prove assault: he had to prove that the assault was committed by the four defendants. With regard to his friend's view that that was an inquiry, he would like his Worship to make it clear that The only reason such a view was erroneous. the four defendants were in Court was that they should be tried for assault, and anything else⚫ done outside could not be considered. Proceeding, he referred to the matter from the
I want you, please, to tell the Court what was the obstructive demeanour of the captain and chief officer that you objected to ?-The capt-point of view of the Opium Ordinance,and point- ain stood on the gangway and said before the tallymen that I had no authority to board
ed out that an excise officer was entitled to go without permission on board any ship in the
a
Mr. 'Gedge-I am not making complaints. What I say is that the police were backing up the excise officers, and when the identification it took place they ought to have insisted upon being done in the ordinary way and not have laughed in their sleeves and said this is not proper.
J
Mr. Shenton objected to those remarks. His Worship-It is fair comment on the evidence.
Mr. Gedge said it was like comic opera to expect the solicitor for the defence to be in charge of the identification. The police should have been absolutely impartial to both sides, and at the time the prosecution should have been told that the identification was not in accordance with the usual regulations. He submitted that so far as it went the men had been properly identified and he asked for a conviction.
His Worship discharged all four defendants. Mr. Shenton asked for costs, but his Worship declined to accede to the request.
The term for which Lord Li Ching-Tong was appointed Minister to London expires next year, and a Chinese contemporary says the Junior Deputy Vice-President of the Waiwupu, Tsao Ju Lin, will be appointed to succeed him.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.