Mitigating Circumstances in Case in U. S. Court: Witness ight 280 Ib. policeman drew his pistol and fired at the fugitive. "He said that he had no intention of hurting the man, and, in fact, would not have only he became excited realize what he was doing. The bullet struck the Chinese in the back, but the wound was not serious.
Crawley was charged at the U. 8. Court before Mr. N. E. Lurton Lurton, Commissioner, with ing a breach of peace and a3- saulting and threatening Mr. J.
Complainant, giving evidence, stated that on October 2, at about 8.30 p.m. Crawley entered his office whilst he was speaking to Mr. Rangel and at the top of his voice commenced to insult him, using the vilest Janguage he had ever heard. Defendant then struck witne: s the face with his right hand, snd with his left struck him on the chest, which caused him severe pain for a' period of three days. Defendent also with the weight of his body pushed witness against the wall, and would have done him serious bodily harm had not Mr. Rangel interfered and told defendant that if he had any complaint to make, he could put it before the Portuguese authorities.
Mr. Collaco questioned by Mr. Schuhl, who appeared for the defence, denied that he molested Mrs. Crawley during her husband's absence at the store. He admitted that the defendant had accused him during the dispute of molesting his wife, but did not think it had anything to do with the ease, and as it was an untruth, he did rot want to talk about it.
Bir, Rangel corroborated Mr. Cellace's evidence.
Crawley stated that daring her husband's absence she had been} nfolested by the complainant and that she informed a Mr. Laval, who Jimmediately sent a cable to her husband. He returned to Shanghai fon the 2nd instant and interviewed Mr. Collaco. She denied having heard her husband use any indecent language at all. He did accuse Mr, Collaco of being a coward for mel jesting her during his absence.
Defendant giving evidence denied having struck the complainant of having used vile language to the extent of the evidence given against him. He added that should he: have struck the complainant there would still have been signs of it, las witness weighed 280 Ib. and a hit from him would leave signs of assault for some time.
Mr. Laval and Mr. Crawley's Chinese assistant gave—similar] evidence for the defence.—Mr.
Schuhl asked the Court to dismiss, the there had not been sufficient evidence advanced to convict the defendant on any of the charges made against him.
His Honour said that, according to the evidence, he was convinced that the defendant did commit a breach of the peace, and he was therefore forced to impose tome sort of punishment. As the circumstances, however, were such a8) would naturally aggravate the éefendant, punishment would mitigated, and defendant would fined G. $5 and warned that should ever a similar charge be brought! against him he would be dealt with more severely.
As stated," a sentence of two months? imprisonment was passed, and the man also has lost his posi tion with the police. According to recent Danish law, the defendant being a first offender, the sent-fence is not immediately operative. If he remains of good behaviour for five years, he will not be sent to prison, but if during that time he again comes before a court, he will have to serve the two months in addition to any other penalty that may be imposed,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.