Mayers (British Assessor) concluded the hearing of the important ease of Chu Lung-lung, and_ released the prisoner, stipulating only for such security as would ensure his appearance again should that be necessary. The charge sheet sot out two charges against him, differing substantially from those preferred against him on Frid"y last. The new charges showed:—(1) that he was arrested on a warrant issued by the Mixed Court Masistrate at the instance of the Vic roy of Nanking, for with eight others being keepers of gambling booths in Li Hongkew in 1898; and (2) that he was arrested on a warrant issued by the Mixed Court at the instance of the District Magistrate for being concerned with five others in the wilful murder of one Sze Foo-zo in Shanghai on the 14th of November, 18°8.
Mx. F. Ellis (Messrs. Browett and Ellis) represented the prisoner. charge sheet to the Court, past i A that Inspector Ramsay handed a copy of the
ha had sent. Mr. Ellis a copy of those two charges, and they were on the new sheet.
The Assessor—It now remains, Mr. Ellis, for you to show the Court why the prisoner should not be sent into the City.
Mr. Ellis—I do not think it will be necessary for me to address my remarks to the Magistrate, because you, Sir, will be able to summarise them to him Jater on, and that will save the time of the Court. The duty now devolves upon me to satisfy you by argument or evidence why you cannot send the prisoner into the City in order that he may be tried on the two charges—of being concerned with others in the murder of @ Chinese subject, which murder apparently tonk place in the Settlement in November, 1898; and the charge of gambling or keeping gambling booths together with others in Li Hongkew, which offence was alleged to have Veen committed in 1898.
The Assessor—You might add that that district was at that time not included in the Settlement.
Mr. Ellis—Yes, Tt will be nece: sary for me in the discharge of my duty to ask you to consider for a moment the Ramsay informed you that he had tailed position of this case. On Friday Inspector
to produce evidence, and that it was his duty to withdraw the two charges—one of extortion, made against the prisoner by a Chinese subject, and the other of gambling and of being a danger to the Settlement, which was made at the instance of the police authorities. Hw informed you that he was bound to withdraw these charges, as he had no evidence to support them or in any way to substantiate them. With regard to the third charge, made ut the instance of the City authorities, you Ind gone into the matter and satisfied yourself that your could not enquire further into it, or that it had not been supported and that it ought to be withdrawn, Although these charges, it is tne, ha been withdrawn, it is my duty to ask you to consider this matter very closely and very 4 carefully, because I contend, Si, most emphatically that before you' can satisfy yourself, and before you can answer the question whether this man shall be handed over to the City authorities to undergo his trial, you should consider the way in which these charges have been made and the way they have been withdrawn. Therewere three charges, two of them very serious ones, and I submit that it was the duty of the police to satisfy you, and to show you why it was they had not been able to carry out the orders of the Court, that is, to execute the warrants, I submit, Sir, it was their duty to show you the efforts that had been made to carry out these orders, and how they had been frustrated, and I submit that it is not incumbent upon me on behalf of the prisoner to do so, although you have already intimated to me that the duty is thrown on ime of showing why this man was not arrested at the time he should have been arrested. I respectfully sunlit, also, that it is not_my°duty to explain to you the inability, or it may be the culpability, of those responsible for the detection of crime in the Settlement. It is enough for me to show, as Tsaid at the beginning, that he 1s nov of these charges, When Inspector Ramsay at the last sitting withdrew those charges he went on. to into the Court that there was another warrant. which had come to light come to light," bear in mind—immediately after the other shad been disposed of. No m rant, ni though the evse had been bef re the Court for many days, and had apparently excited " great deal of interest. 4 at the last moment that Inspector Ramsay tells you that a warrant has come to light "which was issued in January, 1899, in which the prisoner was ckargod with' being concerned with others a certain murder in the Setdement. Inspector Ramsay went on to quote names and to make insinuations, He described the prisoner to you as a regular king in Li Hongkew, but he never offered any ey ence or said he way prepared to show that the prisoner had exercised terror or had power to exercise terror. He comesandtells Youcertain particulars of the murder, where and when it took place, but he does not go further than that, and then practically to crown it all he had what tome seemed the extraordinary. effrontery—L repeat, the effrontery—to tell you that this warrant charging the man with the murder of man in the Settlement was in his. possession, but trid gone out of his possession that of the Mixed Court in some manner which he could not explain, because he did not know. Now, here is " warrant ing 4 man with one of the most serious of crimes, and yet the warrant for his arrest. is tossed to and fro apparently between the Police Station and the Court, and an elficer charged with the duties that Inspector Ramsay is charged with, and occupying such x position, comes here and toils you that he does nut know how the warrant left his possession and got into the possession of the Court, According to my. instructions and the information I have received there was apparently a murder, and the warrant referring to the murder was issued on the Gth of December, 1898, or according to the Chinese calendar the Zth day of the 10th moon of the 24th year of Kuang Hsti, The warrant reads as follows Shanghai Mived Court Magistrate Chang.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.