He then carefully went through the " evidence of both Peters and Judd, which, he warned the _jury, had been given in the witness-box, on oath and must, therefore, receive the same careful consideration as that given to the evidence of any, other witness on oath, He proceeded to read right through his notes of the evidence of both accused, including the eross-examination by the Crowa,~ and the re-examination by their respective counsel, and said:—
"Well, gentlemen, that is the evidence for the defence, and you wil have to. give that evidence Full consideration. These explanations Which have been given by both Peters and Judd have to be considered by you. T have not commented on them myself because 1 think it must be for you, and you alone, to be satisfied whether these explanations are satisfactory and to be believed, but don't forget that not for the accused man to Prosecution to prove "him guilty. These matters only yo to their: credit.
"You will be asked to give separate verdicts for each of the accused. You have your questions; 1 have been' through them with you, and T don't think' I can usefully occupy _your time any longer. You may consider: your verdict"
Tt was exactly 24% pin. when the' fury retired. Despite the fad, however, that the crowd was' very closely packed "together in the: cramped, space afforded for the Public, hardly any' one left the courtroom. At 2.25 pin. the court re-assembled, and a minnie later the jury entered.
Asked if they had considered their verdict, the foreman replied they had. Asked what it was in respect of Peters, he replied "Not Guilty." Cheers sand applause immediately broke out, to be renewed when a similar verdict was returned in the case of Judd.
His Lordship, after inscribing the you are broke out both defendants.
His Lordship then thanked the! Jury" men for the close attention They had paid to the whole case. They would be exempted from duly for a period of ten years, which in. the case of some of them. would mean that they would probably never be called upon to serve on jury in China again, Petition by Rubber Ca., Refused coxsousparrD num men rst, (1914)
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.