Oiloff, a Russian watchman, deposed that deceased approached him and said that he had something to do and asked if accused was on Doard. Accused had been on night duty and he was supposed to be free that day. Witness did not seo the actual stabbing but he heard a shout and he saw deceased bleeding and falling to the ground. Ha rushed out and at once set to work bandages. He did not sce face used or the knife. Deceased treated everybody very roughly and he had struck accused two or three times on the face. Accused, heinz the son of a Russien general and Ihaving received his education in the strong in the belief that a slap we an infamous insult and that such should be revenged by blood. He Idid not sce the Knife in accused's hand or on the deck. fourth witness, William Astapingkoof, said he saw accused stab deceased with a knife. stabbed him on the right side of the chest. Deceased did not make! any statement before he died. Previously, deceased had slapped accused's face and his (accused's) lips bled. About two minutes later, the stabbing took place. The I [was taken from the kitchen.
Wang Chin-tao testified that he saw accused and deceased wrestling, He did not see the actual stabbing put later he saw deceased lying on the deck, dying as the result of a stab wound.
Dr. Withelm said that he was told face used was still suffering from the: shock of the slap on the face. He would ask the Court to appoint doctor to determine accused's mentd The care was then remanded for! hearing by the higher court. recognize him although they took his passport. He has never before been convicted for any offence and denied the charges preferred against A second charge, that_of breaking into and entering the offices fof the Brazilian Consulate, was; then proceeded with. Mr. Carlos A. Pereira, secretary to the Consulate, testified that, at one time, accused had applied to the Consulate for registration claiming to be born in Brazil. He brought a couple of witnesses with him, According to Brazilian law, the Consulate granted a provisional certifiente on the understanding that accused should produce his birth certificate within six months. In January, this yeat, the acting Consul-Gereral, Mr, Nunes Pereira, came to Shanghai and published an advertisement in press, requesting all Brazilian citizens to register themselves at ithe Consulate within ten days and to bring their papers with them in order to prove their citizenship, Accused never appeared and £0 his citizenship was cancelled, At this juncture, accused protested that, once he became a citizen, the Consul-General had no right to his citizenship. From the of law, only the government, this case the Brazilian Government, had the right to deal with jsuch'a matter.
Cross-examined by Dr. Wilhelm, Mr. Pereira said that the certificate inted to accused was erly a provisional one and he could only be recognized og a Brazilian citizen when he produced rrcof that he was. born in Brazil, The Judge remarked that it was; for accused to prove hie citizenship. If he could not prove his Brazili citizenship or the citizenship of a1 Jother country which enjoyed special privileges, he would have to be tried in the Provisional Court. The case would be remanded for hearing by the higher court and accused would have to be detained in custody at the Central Police Station. pending the hearing of his ease. ages, under Chinese law the entployer was only responsible for a servant's conduct when it could be shown that a crime or offense was, Jdue to the employer's failure to Jexercise due care in the selection of his employee or in the supervision lof his conduct, - In this instance the Jemployer was exonerated by the dence from such charges and, since no charge had bosn brought against the chauffeur, the case was The "Shun Pao" Answered:
Incidentally, the plaintiff has'sinee earned that the chauffeur involved thad not been in the defendant's service more than a few months: and that he had been charged on move [than one occasion by the police wi violations of traffic regulations. The defendant's lawyer, a Mr, Chen, some little time ago declared in a letter which appeared in the correspondence columns that the plaintiffs lawyer, Mr. R, F.C. Master, had supplied the China' Daily Ne with material for the previous common Jon the case. The "Shun Peo yesterday made a somewhat similar statement, saying that a foreigner had written a letter to the "North-China Daily News" commenting on ithe case. Both statements are Jwrong. Mr. Master has never com= Jmunicated in any way with the }"North-China Daily News" nor has other foreigner written us about. ithe case, 1 Court has simply got itself into another muddle by giving a decision in cone tra vention of police regulations and is spleenful because it has been jeaught in the act and exposed.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.