Prisoner, formerly a stoker on board the steamer Stentor, was indicted for having ously and' burglariously entered th Gilbert Henderson on the 3st January, with intent to stoss the following were sworn of the Jury Messrs. E, A. Reynolds, H. Dyer, W. A. Turnbull, H. Hertz and ¥. W. Duff Prisoner, who was undefended by Counsel, on being called upon to plead, said, "I donot remember anything of it at all."
His Lorpsutp said that was a plea of not guilty, and directed it to Ue entered acco ingly, The evidence adduced was precisely similar to that given in the Police Court upon the prisoner's commitment, and which we have went up to the look after the remises of Jardine ver the office, Mr. Henders situated, and access to it is gained by a flight of stairs, near which the watchman was standing. When the prisoner came up to him, he accosted him with the words what thing?" The prisoner replied ' what thing?" to which the watchman answered that be was the watchman, Prisoner then laid hold of hie coat, but the watchman broke away and rau off to alarm the compradore, The prisoner chased him for some six or seven yards, then turned back and went upstairs, the watchman averring that as he was still hurrying to. the compradore's office, he heard the noise of breaking glass from the top of the stairs up which the prisoner-had run, An assistant of the compradore ran to inform Mr. Poignand, the wharfinger, whi watchman hastened to the Hongkew Police Station for the Police. Mr. Poignand at once went to Mr. Henderson's room, and found that one of the Jower paues in the glass door, or rather window, was broken, and that the eplintered glass was lying on the floor inside the room, and not on the verandah. He tried to open the door, but it was locked, and he therefore crept through the aperture, and so got into the room. He then drew back the bolts, and wrenched the door open from the lock. ' While he was doing this, prisoner came from behind a Japanese screen placed in the ordinary way round the bed to keep away draught. There was alight burning in the room. Shortly afterwards ce Sergeant Lloyd arrived, and prisoner into custody. Upon Mr. Poiguand asking him what he was doing there, prisoner replied, Ths t what I'd like to know." Sergeant Lloyd stated that the prisoner seemed have been drinking, but to have partially slept off the effects; and it was shown that he could not have so slept it off in Mr. Henderson's bedroom, as he was there only some six or eight minutes before Mr. Poignand arrived, Prisoner made an incoherent statement to Sergeant Lloyd to the effect that he had been chased by Chinese and had taken refuge in the bedroom, having broken the pane with his shoulder; and Mr. Henderson stated that when he returned home, after the prisoner repension, he found everything in his bedroom undisturbed, as he had left it on going out for the evening. Nothing had been stolen.
Several members of the Jury closely questioned the witnesses as to the principal facts in the case, but their replies were merely confirmatory of the 'Upon the facts presented, His Lonnsmir, addressing the Jury, said that after what they had heard, there could be no question that the prisoner had broken into the prosecutor' premises. The only question was as to th Intent with which be had entered thew. The crime of burglary was breaking and entering he in houra of the night, y. It did not matter if nothing was stolen (that being the particular felony charged as haviog been intended), if there was the intent to steal, and whether that intent existed in this case was the question for the jury. The intent was material, beat he did not intend to steal, he woul mere trespasser. The prosecution had charged that prisoner went there for the purpose of stealing, as men do not usually break into people's houses at that time of night without intending sometbiog of the id, and the jury would be perfectly into froom for that pur po vig that prisoue did break On the other baud, if, in the minds of the Jury, the circumstances showed that he did not intend to steal, they would find him not guilty. It would seem that some of the circumstances pointed one way and tome another. The Jury would observe that the prisoner had aid be had been chased by Chinese, and that was how he had come to take refuge in the prosecutors's bedroom; while the watchman had said there were no Chinamen or other persons about. Still the po mer might have got it into his mind, from the little scuiile he had with the watchman, Then there were some circumstances in the prisoner's favour. "Che watchman said there was alight where was standing, and that the prisoner could see him when he cam His going in that open way showed that there was no attempt at concealment. Then, again, there was considerable time during which prisoner was alone in the bedroom; and according to the prosecutor's statement, he did not disturb anything. The whole question resolved itself simply into that of whether the prisoner broke into the bedroom with the intention of stealing. Ifthe Jury were satisfied that be went there for that purpose they must find bim guilty; if they were not—-and they should give Lim the benefit of any reasonable doubt they might have on the point—they would find him not guilt; After some consideration, Mr. Reynolds, as foreman of the Jury, said—Onr verdict is that the prisoner did not enter the premises for the purpose of stealing.
His Lonpsmir said that was a verdict of not guilty; and then, addressing the prisoner, told him that he had been guilty of a very ambiguous act, to say the least, and if the Jury had found him guilty, he must hat sentenced him to a considerable term of im-Prisonment, As it was, his Lordship hoped. Prisoner's escape would be a warning to him.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.