KPT Y68 1894a CORNELL UNIVERSrry LIBRARY ITHACA, N.Y. 14853 jbhn M. Edhols Collection on Southi^ast Asia n^f CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARV 3 1924 067 565 170 FULL REPORT (pritJj ^acumctttarjr ^ippenbices*) OF THE Irs §,st Crisl JJEPOEE THE SI>ECIAL COTJUT AT BANGKOK. BANGKOK; PriutLtl at till' Bainjhjk Tiinvn Offiw. 1894. KPT HI "-"^'/, -J o ^' ^^'CA.S>^ %oml Becwt INSTITUTING A SPECIAL AND TEMPOKAEY COUET fmr tJj« tvirtl 0f Hje affaivs of ^ Tong-Xieng-Kham AND Keng-Chek (Kham-Muon.) (Translated from the Siamene Official text.) We, Somdetch Phra Paramindr Malia Ohulaloiigkoni Phra Chula Ohom Klao, King of Siam, &c., &c., &c. Considering Article III o( the Convention uoncludecl ou the third day of October 1893 between Our Plenipotentiary and the Plenipotentiary of the •French Republic. (1) Whereas some of our subjects are accused of having committed crimes against French subjects at Tong-Xieng-Kham on the 22nd day of September 1891, and at. Keng-Chek (Kham-Muon) on the 3rd day of June 1893; And whereas it is Our earnest desii-e that full and fair execution be^given to all engagements made in Our name, and that any crime which might be proved, after .due investigation, to have been committed by a ny of our subjects be condignly punished : — Have decreed acd do hereby decree : — Paet I. — Constitution of the Coukt. , c 1. — A special and temporary Court, composed of one Chief Justice and six Judges, who jointly shall have to judge both of law and fact, is hereby instituted for the trial of any Siamese subject accused of having committed crimes against French subjects at the time and places aforesaid. The name of this Court shall be: — The Special Court for the affairs of Tong-Xieng-Kham and Keng-Chek (Kham-Muon). 2. — The following persons are I'cspectively appointed as Chief Justice and Judges in the said Court : — Chief Justice : — Our beloved brother, Krom Luang Bijitprijakorj. Judges : — Phya Siharaj Dejojai, Phya Abhaironaridhi, Phya Devesr Wongse Vivadh, Phya Dhammasaranitti, Phya Dhamraasaranetti, and Phya Ridhirong Ronached. 3. — ^The following persons are appointed to act in the said Court as Ad- vocates for the Crown: Luang Sunthorn Kosa and Nai Hasbamro Humphre. 4. — The persons appointed under Sections 2 and 3 of the present Act shall hold their office for the time necessary to the complete trial and judgment of the cases determined in section 1. In order to provide against any accident, of demise or illness or otherwise, of one or more of them, resulting in the impos- sibility of fulfilling their functions till the final judgment, power is hereby "■ranted, and order given, to our Minister of Justice ad interim to appoint in (1) Convention of October u IHOa. Ai't III. " The authors of the outraf{es of Tong Xienij Khani " and Kham Moim shall be tried by the Siamese authorities a Representative of France shall he present '• at the trial, and watch the .execution of the penalties pronounced. The French Goveniinent reserves " to itself the rijrht of appreciatintr if the (Mjndeinuatious are i.uliicient iiud. ouvyntually. to claim a new "trial Ijeforc a mixed Court. wliL-iLMt' it sh:ill determine tlio '.■niiipDBitiou." Our name few other persons selected by him from amongst the Chief Justices or Assistant Judges of Our seven Courts of Justice sitting at Bangkok, as Assistant Judges in reserve, to watch the proceedings and to fill up in case of vacancy m the said Court. 5. — The Chiet Justice of this Court is hereby empowered to appoint the place at which the Court shall be held, and to desigaate the persons who shall have to act, for the time being, as Recorder, clerks, interpreters, ushers, and generally all the officers or servants to be attached to the Court and to deter-, mine their duties and remuneration. PaBT II. — rBELIMINABY PkOCESS. 6. — All documents, correspondence, official reports, and, in a general way, all means of j udicial information referring to the aforesaid affaii's which are or will be possessed by Our Government or which have been or will be communi- cated to Our Minister for Foreign Affairs by the Minister Resident of the French Republic at. Bangkok, shall be transmitted by Our Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Advocates of the Crown, appointed by sect. 3 of this act, 7. — After having received and perused the papers m entioned in Sect. 6, and after having conferred on the subject with the special representative ap- pointed by the G-overnment of the French Republic, in consequence of the Convention of October 3rd 1893, the Adv ocates of the Crown shall draft and hand over to the Chief- Justice, two Acts of Information, one for the affiiir of Tong-Xieng Kham, and the other for the affair of Keng-Chek (Kham-Muon). Each of these acts must set forth : — (a) The 'names of the accused ; (b) The offences which are imputed to them : (c) The punishments which, according to Siamese law, may be inflicted on persons found guilty of such offences. 8. — Within three days after having received the said Acts of Information or one of them, the Chief-Justice shall issue warrants for the apprehension of the accused, and at the same time he shall determine for each affair the earliest con- venient day whereon the accused persons shall be called to the bar of the Court to answer the matter charged upon them. Notice of this decision shall be "iven in due time to the Minister Resident of France and the Special Representative of the French Republic. Pabt III.— Tbul. 9.— On the appointed day, immediately after the accused have been brought to the bar and identified, the Act of information, the depositions or other evidence produced against them, and, if the accused person or persons require it the translation in Siamese of such documents as happen to be written in another tongue, will be read over to him or them, and then the Chiaf-Justice shall ask him or them if he or they wish to say anything in answer to the charge. Whatever any accused says shall be taken down, read over to him, and may be used as evidence against him without further proof. If he admits the charge and pleads no defence or extenuating circumstiinces, the Court may convict him' accordingly. • ' If one or more accused persons abscond or escape, and if they do not reappea'^ — 3 — after ten days, the Court may proceed to the trial as if they were present, and did not plead any defence or extenuating circumstance. 10. — Any accused shall be entitled to the assistance of one or more Counsel provided tiie Counsel possess the necess'ii-y requisites to be admitted as such before a Siamese Court ; and he shall be allowed to make, himself or by his . Counsel, his full answer to the charge, and to i!ro>s-examine any witness heard against him, and to adduce any witness or any evidence in his defence. He will, himself, or by his Counsel, deliver a list of liis witnesses to one of the Advo- cates of the Crown. 11. — When the accused shall have answered to the charge, one of the Advo- cates of the Crown shall read the list of the witnesses who have to be heard either at his request or at the request of the Special Representative of the French Republic, or at the request of the accused. The Chief Justice will then have all the witnesses called successfully by their names, and will order them to withdraw together into a room destined for them, where the}"- shall have to wait i'until they ai-e called to give evidence. 12. — Every witness shall be called to give evidence separately, and the Chief Justice shall decide in what order tlve Avituesses have successively to be called. 13. — All evidence shall be given on oath, in the form or with the ceremony that the witness declares to be binding on his conscience. 14. — The Advocates for the Crown and the Representative of the French Republic may cross-examine any witness adduced by the accused. 15. — Any evidence given in a language not understood by the accused shall be interpreted to him as the examination proceeds. Any evidence given in Siamese or in any other Asiatic language shall be interpreted in French whenever desired by the Representative of the French Republic. No person accused, or having given written or oral evidence in one of the cases submitted to this Court, may act as interpreter. 16. — At any stage of the proceedings the Court, either of its own motion or on the application of any party, may summon a Siamese subject to attend to give evidence, or to produce documents, or to be examined, and, if necessary, the Court may issue a warrant to compel his attendance. 17. — If it appears that a foreign subject is likely to give material evidence, either for the prosecution or for the defence, the Court may request Our Minit- ter for Foreign Affairs to talse necessary steps with the competent Foreign Minister or Consul in order to have the said foreign subject appear. The voyage and other e.-^penses of such witness shall be defrayed by Our Royal Treasury. ly. The accused may request, after the witnesses have given evidence, that some of them withdraw again from the Court, and that one or more be heard again, either separately, or being confronted with each other. The Chief Justice may order, and the Advocate.'^ of thj Crown may request the same. 19. If there are several persons accused in the same affair the Chief Justice, during or after the hearing of a witness, may order one or more of the accused to withdraw, and separately examine them on some circumstances of the case ; but as soon as one of the accused is brought back to the bar, the Chief "Justice shfill inform him of what has been done pending his absence, and of what resulted therefrom. 20.— The Chief Justice shall decide iu what order the facts imputed to several persons accused in the same affair have to be investigated. 21. — After the witnesses have been heard and examined, the Advocates of the Crown, or one of them, shall fram.e and record the questions of law and fact on which the right decision of the Court may depend. In so doing they shall pay all due attention to the remarks which the Re presentative of the French Government may have communicated to them in support of the charge. The accused, or his or their Counsel, may then address the Court, the Advocates of the Crown may reply, if they think fi^, but the last word must belong to the accused, or his or their Counsel. The Court shall then adjourn for judgment. 22. — The Chief Justice has a discretionary power in virtue of which he can take proper measures to enlighten the conscience of the Court and to remove from the proceedings all causes which appear of a nature to prolong it without interest for the prosecution or the defence, 23. — Once the trial is commanced the affair shall be proceeded on in the audience and judged withput unnecessary delay. The Court shall exclusively be occupied with the affairs for which it is constituted, and the proceedings shall contin ue without other interruptions than those which are necessary for the ordina ry wants of life; the judgment after the close of the trial shall be given publicly at the latest in the 24 hours. Part IV. — Judgment. 24. — The Judgment, which must be written down, signed by the Chief- Justice, the six Judges, and the Recorder, shall i-eturn answers, concerning every accused, to the following questions : — (1) "Is the accused guilty of having committed the crime or crimes which is or are imputed to him ? " (2) If some aggravating or extenuating circumstance has been pleaded against or on behalf of the accused : " Has the accused committed the crime under such or such circumstances? " (3) If some legally allowable excuse has been pleaded in defence of the accused : (a) " Is the fact alleged as an excuse duly proved?" And, if it was proved, , (b) " Is such fact a legally allowable excuse? " If. from the answers to the foregoing questions, it appear that the accused isguiltyof no crime, the Court in pronouncing judgment shall conclude by declaring him quit and discharged of the accusation. If, on the contrary it appear that he has, with or without ag g ravating or extenuating circumstances and without any legal excuse, committed the crime which is imputed to him' the Court bhall conclude by awarding the punishment which the Siamese law iu force has prescribed for this crime. The Court may also order the accused when convicted of the crime imputed to him, to pay all or any part of the expenses of his trial. 25.— The Court shall deliberate aud decide ou the substance and on the' terms of the judgment with closed doors. In every case and on every point the Chief Justice shall ask for the individual opinion of every Judge com 5 — menoing with the oldest. He shall -give his own opinion last. No question will be decided unless bj a majority of at least four votes in seven. If more than two different opinions are expressed on the same point, and if there is no majority for any of them, the Judges whose opinions are the most unfavourable to the accused, are bound to accede to one of the other opinions. It is Our express Royal Will and Command that, in giving their opinions on the questions of law and of fact which they have to decide, the members of this Court only consult their calm reason and their conscience, that they do not allow themselves to be misguided by any consideration of personal or national sympathy, so that the sentences to be passed by this Court be as conformabfe as possible to truth and j ustice. Part V. — Supplemental, 26. — The sittings ot the Court, either for trial or for reading the judgment, flhall be public. The Chief Justice shall have the power to i-emove or exclude persons who interrupt or obstruct the proceedings of the Court. 27. — Every facility shall be given to the Representative of the French G-)V- ernment to make use of the right which he lias, by virtue of the Convention of October 3rd, 1893, to attend the proceedings. 28. — The Special Court instituted by this Act shall have such seal as may be directed in writing by Our Minister of Justice ad inte rim. 29. — Proper minutes of the proceedings shall be drawn up, and shall be signed by the Chief Justice, the Judges, and the Recorder, and sealed with the seal of the Court. The minutes, with depositions of witnesses, and notes of evidence taken at the trial, shall be preserved in the Archives of Our Ministry of Justice. A copy of the minutes of the proceedings and notes of theevidence shall be forwarded after the judgment to the Miaister Rasidanb of the Freuch Republic. Given at Bangkok, on Thursday, the 8th of February, 1894, Being the 26t.h year of Our reign. «o.o<3^0oeotor of militia Grosgarin, and the massacre of his detachment of militia by the Siamese mandarin vrhom he was conducting to the Mekong, and by the Siamese come from Outbene and from other places after being called by the mandarin of ICham Muon. M . Luce, the Resident, who had to superintend operations in Kam Ma on and Kam Cot, and by whose telegrams I got my iirst informations, has just handed me on his return from Kham Muon, a detailed report which on account of the bad state of his health he could not finish before the 27th of June. c In order to facilitate to the G-averain'jut the claim for the oomoensation due to France by Siam, I think it advisable that I should give you, concerning the incidents of Kieng Chek, a special report recapitubiting the whole of the facts mentioned in my fore- going telegrams and borrovring a great deal from the report of M. le Resident Luce. By my extensive report of the 9th oc June No. 166 you already know how M. le Re- sident Luce arrived on the 18th of May at Kham Muon to take again possession of the re- gfion in the name of the French Guvemment, and what was Lis first intercourse with the mandarin of the rank of Kh.a Luang who commanded the Siamese post and the region. I will not repeat this preliminary information and will simply quote the passage of the report of M. Luce relating to his arrival at Kha Mnang. "I arrived at Kha Muang on the I8th of May at five o'clock in the evening, writes " M. Luce, followed as far as two days' march by a great number of persons of note, and "inhabitants of the sniTounding villages. On the day before, I had sent to the village of "Kham Muon in order that they should prepare the lodgings which 1 wanted. In the vil- "lages which immediately preceded Kham Muon, the inhabitants wei-e waiting on the road " to greet me in the usual fashion of the country, although the Kha Luang of Kham Muon "had sent soldiers to forbid them to ahow thomselves to the French. "The persons of note of Kam Muon and those of some neighbouring localities were " waiting for me at the entrance of their village. Thoy had prepared for me the best " houses of the village, and I had hardly taken possession of my lodgings, when they all "came in mass to greet me and to thank me for the interest which we showed them " During the first days of his installation, M. Luce, as you already know by my report of the 9th of June, tolerated the occupation of his post by the Kha Luang, who refused to- leave it until he received superior orders from Bangkok, and he simply forbade tho inhabitants to communicate witli him% , Whilst our representative showed, by this toleration, how much France wished to spare Siam, and to safeguard the dignity of a weaker nation, the inhabitants ur<.Qd him to be "less scrupulous : " All the persons of note of the villages,'' writes M. Luce 11 — " renewed against the Kha Luauy tlie acoiisatious oE imirdei'j of .theft, which they so " often sent to the residence of Vinh and to tlie provincial mandarins. They begged "that I should not send the Siamese back, but judge them, luid punish them on tlie spot." It was only in the morning of the 22nd that M. Luce proceeded to occupy the Siamese post and to the confiscate the arms, and notified to the Kba Luang that he was to take him back to the Mekong. "I went to the post," says M. Luce in his report, "and I said to the Kha Luang that as iiif had compelled me against my will to " use violence against him, when he refused tu accede to my arguments and to leave " willingly and in a proper way, i wonld immediately gather all necessary means of " transport to convey him to Kieng Chek with his party and with all his belongings. " I would have him escorted by an inspector and civil guards in order that he should "not have difficulties during his voyage with tbe inhabitants who did not like him. 1 "then invited him to have himself all liis goods removed in ray presence in order that "it might not be said that he had been robbed by tlie men.'' The Kha Luang acquiesced in these decisions. In the evening of the 25th, on the eve of his departure, he sent to M. Luce a letter wherein he told him that he first had not accepted his intervention because he occupied the region by order of the King of Siam, but that, considenni; his present injunctions, he took the decision of delivering to him the teiTitory and its inhabitants. He said both the French and the Siamese Government would settle the question later on. I annex to tke present report the original of this letter and its translation. You will judge, as M. Luce and I did, by the inspection of this document, that the Kba Luang completely accejited the situation wherein fio was placed. On the following day, the 26th of May, they all left. "Tht; Kha Luang passed before me," says M. Luce, " at the moment when I gave my last instructions to M. Grosgnrin, and we very courteously greeted each other." The inspector M. Grosgurin, who was instructed to escort the Kha Luang as far as the Mekong through Kieng Chek and the Nam Hin Boun and to study on his return tbe best means of communication fi^m the Mekong to Kham Muon took 7.-ith hin a Cambodian interpreter and a simple escort of 20 militiamen intended, as M. Luce says, to prevent that the Kha Luang " should have during his voyage difficulties with the inhabitants who did not like him.'' There was on tlie road, between Kam Muon and the great river, no Siamese military post, and M. Grosuui-in had nothing to fear for himself and for his men from thi inhabitants, who, on the contrary, gathered round us full of gratitude. " As at the Siamese Custom House of Kieng Chek, says M. Luce, the spot where the "Nam Hin Boun becomes navigable, there were not soldiers and was only a Laotian clerk " of Cam Coh, as moreover there was no other Siamese post as far as the Mekong, no ''danger seemed to threaten the escort on its way." P. CuPIE CoNPOKJlE, Le MiNisTKi; Residknt, (S.) A Pavie. — 12 — II. Statement of the Prenoh-Cambodian Interpreter Boon-Chan, taken before" Luang Vichit Sarasatr, Assistant Commissioner of Paen at Ban Nakrok, on the 5th of June, 1893. I, Boon-Ch-'.-a, French-Cambodian Interpreter, state that I ani 28 years of age, I was born at Pnom-penh, and I had been engaged as Interpreter Co Monsieur Champenois at Kanong-ma vrhen he came into Kham muou. On what day, I cannot remember bat in May 1893, Monsieur Grosgarin with 15 soldiers and 13 other followers was sent by Mon- sieur Luce to take Phra Yot down to the Mekong, I joined him as interpreter. Five days after, on oar arrival at Kieng-Chf.k, Monsieur Grosgurin sent Phra Yot to stay at the honse below Eicng Chek while he (Mons. Grosgurin) himself was staying in the village of Kieng Chek, and then, Monsiear Grosgurin went down with 9 soldiers to arrest Luang Anuraks, an assistant of Phra Yot, and took him to be detained at his house. Phra Yot, then, sent a Siamese to ask for. the delivery of Luang Anuraks, Monsieur Grosgurin told me to reply that he would do so by the time when he recovered from his sickness and arrived at Outhene. On the 3rd instant at noon Phra Yot an-ived at oar place with 50 soldiers, and proceeded to ask for the delivery of Luang Anuraks, but not having yet asked, Luang Anuraks jumped from the house and then the fightiog took place. But who fired the first shot 1 do not know, I heard that there are three Annamitc soldiers killed and Monsieur Grosgurin himself was also killed. Just before the fighting I know that M, Grosgurin had written to M. Luce, but what he actually wrote I do not know. During the fighting I was wounded at my left shoulder and at my left leg so I fell down and the Siamese soldiers took me as prisoner. At the camp Kauong-ma, Kliam-muon, I know that 300 Annamite soldiers were there. This is the truth I now state and am a sane man and subscribe my name to my statement. (Signature in Cambodian characters.) 13- III. Statement entirely written by the French-Cambodian Interpreter Boon- Chan, and delivered by him when he was at Nongkai, to the Chief Commissioner H. B. H. Prince Krom Mun Prachak Silpagom. (TranslatKd from tlie French.) MY DBPARTUEK PROM GAMBOGE. My name is Boon Chan. As Cambodiau interpreter I was, in April 1892, with M. Macey, chief of the commercial mission at Laau'g Prabang. I came to Tonkin. M. Macey had sent me to convey M. Champenois, commercial agent to Onthene, to sell goods. I stayed as his interpreter for two months at Oathene. I returned to Anuam via Kham Kot and Kham Mouu. When he arrived to the post of Kha Nong Ma, he left me there to watch his goods. He himself left for Bangkok. When he arrived at Bangkok, he sent me a letter at Kha Nong Ma, saying that he left for France and would come back after six months. I waited for him during five months but he did not come back. AFFAIR BETWEEN THE SIAMESE AND* THE FRENCH AT KIENG-CHEK. After the capture of the post of Kh:im Muon, Mr. Luce, Resident at Vinh,*sent M. Groagurin, captain chief guard (capilaine garde pTtncipal) and myself as interpreter to have the Siamese Commissioner escorted to the frontier of Siam, that is to the riglit bank of the Mekong. On the 5th May, 1893, Capt. Grosgurin and myself left Kham Muou for Kieug Chek, with his men, numbering in all about 30 persons. After five days from Kham Maon we arrived at the village of Kieng Chek. Capt. Grosgurin had got fever, so he rested in. this village trying to find canoes, in order to go down to Outhene. He had stayed for two nights, when the natives iuformed him that Chan Khun Prayot intended to escape from Kieng Chek to go and take his concession {pour aller prendre sa coneession)? a Wien kasen. After having received this information. Captain Grosgarin took with him ten of his militiamen, to go to the place where Chan Khun Prayot had settled. When he arrived, ho spoke only two or three words with Chau Khun Prayot, then he asked : — " Where is L uang Auurak Phou Chui " ? When Auurak Phou Chni arrived, Capt. Gro sgurin ordered his militiamen to arrest liim and to take him ta the canoe. At the moment when the militiamen bad seized Luang Auurak Pliou Chui by the hand, he kicked the militiamen. Unfortunately he is weak, and he fell all at once on the floor. After that he was conveyed to Kieng Chek. Capt. Grosgurin had only kept him for one day, when Chau Khun Prayot sent one of his delegates to ask that he should release Khun Phou Chui (Luang Auurak). Capt. Grosgurin did uot cons'int. After two days Chau Khun Prayot took with him about sixty soldiers to go to Kieng Chek. He came to Kieng Chek at about eleven in the morning. I had gone out to have a walk in the village. 1 then heard the voice of all the people crying. I returned, and found the Siamese soldiers and the Anuaraosc militiamen round about the house. — [- Auuuiueae I "J 1" 1 uiilitiameu. II II Siamese | -{ 1- | soldiers. + I then immediately went up to the house.' Capt. Grosgurin had also cried " Wait a minute, I want to speak." Then he entered the house. At this moment Khun Phou Chui (Luang Anurak) havinjj^ found that the Siamese soldiers were arrived, at once leaped down. At this tiuiu i liuanl ^'uushots, L unforluualcjly Jo uot kuuw who -14 — fired first. During 'the manoeavre, I eutered the house, and found Capt. Grosgurin just loading his revolver. Thereafter one bullet hit my back, and another hit my leg and X went to sit down in a compartment. Wlien the fire had ceased, I went down and stated that .the house was already half burned, and I came with Chau Khun Phra Tot. I then • found Khun Yang dead before the house. I heard Siamese soldiers saying that Capt. Grosgurin was killed. He had a bullet in bis leg and another in his head. The day after Chau Khun Phra Yot led me to Outhene, then from Outhene to Nong Khai. When we arrived at Nong Khai there was a mandarin named Prahabariban Krom Mamnang who came to receive me from the boat and took me to his house ivitli an Annamite militiaman. Then the Yice-roy at Nong Khai gave me many things : the mat mattress, one blanket, and waistcoats and what I wanted for dressing myself. The Prahariban also gave us good food in his house. When I arrived at Nong Khai I heard people saying tha^ there was a wounded Annamito whom they had brought to Outhene and that he was dead. (Signed,) Boon Chan. -15- IV. statement of the French-Cambodian Interpreter Boon-Chan, taken befoi-e M. Pavie, Minister of France, on the 20th October, 1893. (Communicated by M. Pavie to H. li. II. Prince Devawonyse.) {Translated /roM the trench.) To-day 20th October 189;J, at uiue o'clock in tlie iiiorniug, before iis, Consul General Acting Minister Resident of Franco iu Siaui, nssisted by our Chanuelier appeared Boon Clian, Cambodian interpreter attached to the luissiou of M. Grosguriu, luspecteur do la Milice. And we forth witli proceeded "to hearing him as follows : — My name is Boon Chan. I was born at Pnom-Penh and lam 28 years old. My father was lutendant of the King for the elephants. When I was 19 years old, I left with M. Aymonnier and travelled with him in Cambodia and in Laos during 18 months (1883 and 1884). When M. Aymonnier had returned to Prance, I went to M. Pavie and said to hira. "I served under M. Aymonnier, will you help me ?" M. Pavie^took me with him to Paris to become a pupil of the Colonial School- At the end of 1888, I cauie back to Cambodia and was employed for two years in the telegraphic servicf. Then I left for Laos in the Pavie Mission. I was interpretei' to M. Massie from H'tuoi to Xieng Honng in the Sip-Song- Pana on the Mekong where we again met M. Pavie. I then became interpreter to M. Macey, chief of the commercial mission of High Laos. I weut down with M. Macey to Laang Phrabang and Viuh. Whilst M.. Macey was gone to Prance, I weut to wait for him in Cambodia. When M. Macey caine back from France he placed uie with M. Champenois to go with him to Outhene. I made, with M. Champenois and M. Esquilat in 1892, the journey to Outhene where we were so uufortuuate with the Siamese. When M. Champenois left for Franco he said to me : You go and watch the croods which are at Nape. I thus left for Nape whore I took care of the goods. In the meanwhile, in May 1898, the Resident M. Luce had already takeu Kanimoun from the Siamese. He wanted an interpreter for M. Grosgurin who had to lead the Siamese Commissioner, named Phra Yot, to Outhene. The Resident had sent M. Grosgurin to Nape to inform me of this journey. When M. Grosgurin arrived at Nape he said to me. " The Resident, M. Luce, instructed me to inform you that he wants an interpreter for me as I have to lead the Siamese Commissioner to Outhene, and during your absence you may intrust all the goods to the chief of the post." I then begged that he should assist me in this^business. After having delivered all these goods to the chief of the post, M. Grosgurin ordered me to leave for Khammouu one day before him with the elephants loaded with provisions. I left, and after eight hours, I arrived at Ehammoun. The resident told me that I had to leave for Outhene with M. Grosgurin, who was accompanying the Siamese Commissioner. The next day, on the 28th of May 1893, M. Grosguriu and myself set ofiF with twelve elephants and about twenty Anuamesu militiamen oondacting Phra Yot and his soldiers, wilii their wives and their children. Their number was iitty, not including the women, the ofaildi-en and the servants. When we were on our way we arrived at Nam Theune, our first halting place. Prom Nam to Pha Muang we walked straight ahead *o our second haltiug place. At Pha Muahg we settled in the sala situated opposite the village, whilst the Siamese Commissioner and his men arrived only a few hours later. On that day the weather was bad aud i-ainy. M. Grosgurin, seeing that these men with their wives and children were going to sleep in the open air and in the rain, had compas- sion on them, and sent me to ask the chief of the village for such shelter as was neces- sary to allow them to spend the night. The chief of the village) offered houses for them. I went then to inform the Siamese Commissioner, iu M. Grosgurin's name, that we had fonnd shelter for his men ami for him ; this lie iicceptod with pleasure. On the uc'xt iiii.'rniiJij-, brt'uri- lijii villi;- the vilhiL'i', M. (Trr)>Lj-iii'iu -unL luu Iu ti'il Llif — 16 — Commissioaer tUat lie might spoad the night in the village of Ban Nakhene, because tb day's march would he v iry long, and as his men had their -vives and children with thei it would be impossible- 1 1 reach the shelter of Lat Muong where we had to stop. From Lat Muong to Ban .Va-Lakhine— after we left this haltiug-p!a oe — we passe over the mountain called Phou Hai. When we came down th is mountain, along whic flows a river Houy Tao, M. Grosgurin became ill. The fever be<;an and when sitting oi the elephant he was taken with vomiting ; notwithstanding the bad state of his healt! we continued our way as far as the village of Ban Na-Lakhiuc. When we arrived there we left the shelter for the Siamese in order that they should be able to stop there when the; arrived at night. We ourselves went to the village quite near. In the evening the Sia mese Commissioner and his whole party succeeded in joining us. The illness of M. Grosgurii went on increasing. On the nest morning M. G-rosguriaaske 1 ;ue some information abou the village of Kieng Chek where we had to stop in the eveniug. I gave him all th< information I knew, and he then sent me to tell the Siamese Commissioner that on hi: arrival at PGeng Chek he . would bo allowed to occupy the shelters, on account of hii having many people with him, and we with our militiamen would stay in the village. When we arrived at Kieng Chek we sent, notice of our arrival to all persons of mark in the village. And in consequence we requested them to provide us with the necessary canoes to go down as far as Outhene with ' the Siamese Commissioner. These persone however begged that we would wait ,a few days in order to allow them to gather the necessary canoes. * Phra Yot and his men, instead of coming to the shelter pointed out by M. Grosgurin, cut the way so as to reach the abandoned village situated half an hour below that of Eieng Chek where we were quartered. On the same evening M. Grosgurin sent me to see what was going on, and to ask from the Siame.se Commissioner, why he did not stop at the shelter. Phra Yot replied that, at the sp ot mentioned there was not room enough for his men, and that he preferred to stay there where there was plenty of space. My opinion is that the shelter could easily hold two or three hundred men. When I arrived at Phra Yot's oarap, ."■ noticed that four canoes loaded with provisions had just ar- rived from Outhene. M. Grosgurin ho vever did not suppose that the Siamese meant any harm against him. He on the contrary believe d, during his whole voyage, that we might live on good terms with him until the end of his mission. When he had occasion to converse with the Siamese Commissioner he used to speak ii^ a friendly way with him. Very early next morning th ; inhabitants told me that, the night before, the Siamese soldiers came in all the houses of the vihage to seek for the necessary tools to fortify the rock ot Wieng Krasene, but that they refused to give them saying that t loy had no such tools. " Be- cause," so they told me, " wo are not wilUng to give them." I immediately reported this to M. Grosgurin. But l-.e replied, that he understood the matter and explained it thus "When we had takenKhamMuon, Luang Anurak Phou Chjoy, Lieutenant of Phra Yot had frightened the inhabitants of the village with spreading over the country a rumour that the Siamese withdrew from Kham Muon for two days only, but that they thereafter would come back in force, to fi{;ht the French. The inhabitants were struck with fear • part of them had taken refuge in the woods, but the rest did nevertheless persist in remaining on the spot." About nine o'clock he told me to fetch him a canoe large enough for a dozen men; because he wanted to get to Phra Yot's camp. Having found the canoe we embarked. Our party consisted of 10 Annamite militiamen, of himseif, although he was ill and of myself. So we started and fin?.lly arrived at his camp. Phra Yot addressed M. Grosgurin as follows : "Ifyouhtve somethin.. to tell mP you have only to send your mterprewc. Don't take the trouble of coming vour,«lf Ihavebeeninformedthatyouareill." And he added " What l..i«;n„a. laeir as here for ?" "You will know in a moment why Itake^e I!:;ie":rclrgZ:Tt'l at present am unable to talk about it because I am too tired," was JVT Gr " ' After a short time, he asked the Siamese Commissioner where was L„^„ !*?""" ! '™ '^' Chuey, his Lieutenant. Phra Yot called bis Lieutenant who apperred ^ ' ^''°" M. Grosgurin ordered the militiamen to ai-rest Luanir Anurak 'TU^ ;:■ mediately surrounded him, but he defended l"-elf hit'tinj the Annamltes wlrhTfiS: -17 - Seeing this, PLra Yot asked M. Grosgurin the reason nrby. Bat M.^ Grosguria replied that he would answer later. He then told the Siamese Commissioner that he ought not to He anxious about Luang Anurak, who would be well treated, and that, after having found the necessary canoes, we would go down together to Oatheue. He besides allowed Luang Annrak to take one or two servants with liini. Luang Anurak, having seen that he was arrested, said : " They are a gang of plunderers. After having plundered Kham Muon, they come to plunder us here also." At noon we returned to Kieng Chek with our men. In the afternoon Phra Yot sent his secretary to beg from M. Grosgurin that he would allow Luang Nurak to return, and ask for what reason his lieutenant was arresteJ. M. Grosgurin replied that it was impossible for him to allow Luang Anurak to return, to his camp before having all the canoes required, and that Luang Anurak was nob so unhappy being with us. The secre- tary, after having said that if we did not leave Luang Anurak free, the tie of friendship would be broken, returned to make his report to Phra Tot. In the following night, the Siamese Commissioner withdrew with his whole party down the river as far as the rock Wieng Krasene, which place he intended to fortify to prevent the passage of the French. The next day the inhabitants came to tell us this news, saying that Phra Yot had already gone down to the rock of Wieng Krasene and that the Prince of Nong Khai had sent 300 men all armed to join Phra Yot, in order to keep up the stniggle against the French. • At this time M. Grosgurin happened to be in a bad state of health, his illness ^rew more and more serious. He was no more conscious of what he said nor of what he ordered. He could not, since several days, take any food. When I told him what I had heard, he did not understand me very well. I then addressed a letter to the Resident, M. Luce, relating the state of ill-health of M. Grosgurin, and requesting him kindly to send another officer to take up the command as soon as possible- I well recommended to the coolies who carried the message to march night and day. But at about ten o'clock in the morning the Siamese Commissioner and his 200 soldiers arrived, and took position in front of the village at a distance of about t»n metres from our abode. I immediately informed M. Grosgurin of their arrival. He was laying down ; but faintly conscious, he had assured me that the Siamese meant no harm against us, instructing me to go and ask the Commis ' sio&er what he came to do here. When I arrived at the entrance of the encampment, the six Siamese soldiers who were there on duty pointed their loaded guns at me. I at once explained to them what I came for, and they then spared my life. The Siamese officer who watched this entrance, ordered his men to be prudent and not let me in. I was obliged to converse outside before this gate. On my asking what they came for with so many armed men, the officer replied: "We come to speak to the Captain, and at the same time to ask for the release of Luang Anurak Phou Chue. I then retorted that if they wanted to speak to the Captain, they must come in the usual way and not with so many armed men. The Siamese then assured me that they meant no harm against us, but they were waiting for the arrival of their chief who was Phra Yot. As for him he hides in the encampment. I then came back and reported to M. Grosgurin what had happened. In the meanwhile our bouse was suddenly sn^ounded with Siamese soldiers. And the sound of gun loading was heard everywhere. Seeing the arrival of these men, Luang Annrak had escaped from the house and the Siamese had opened fire. I cried to our militiamen " To Arms ! " and I went out to prevent the Siamese from firing, but they took no notice of my entreaty and began at a distance of 5 or 6 metres, firing on the house. At the same moment, I got a bullet in the thigh and turned round, to warn M. Grosgurin, who just stood up, that I was wounded. He replied, whilst loading his revolver : " I too, my friend, received one in the leg." Having no other weapon but my shooting gun, I had taken it and was able to fire five or six shots on our enemies. When I turned round a second time, M. Grosgurin had already received the second bullet, in his head, and fell dead. Seeing this terrible scene, I thought of the topographical map which the Siamese previously wished so much to have. I resolved not to let it fall into their handii and I dashed down on it and tore it to pieces. During this — 18 — time a second bullet liad pieroed mo from tlio back to tlie aliouldei-. It happily spared liiy life. The firing unceasingly continued, our militiamen defending their lives as best they could. . . All of a sudden Khoon Vieng, chief of the Siamese, ascended the stairs, sword in hand, shouting: "Let us cut the head off this French brigand, and send it up to the Prince at Nong Khai." But this Siamese chief had scarcely ascended more than three steps, when ono of our brave militiamen sent a bullet i nto his infamous heart, and he fell dead near the stairs. I then went towards the room, to take the cartridges of my gun, and three Siamese ballets lightly wounded me, the fii-st at ray stomach, the second at my right hand, and the third at my right leg. After having received those five wounds, I felt very weak and exhausted. I was unable to move. During his a, ttack Phra Yot kept on rousing his men, staying at the same time behind them. Some of our militiamen, stating that they were much inferior in force to the Siamese disappeared; others, "in the contrary, were killed and I saw their corpses around the house where M. Grosgurin lay dea 1. The Siamese stopped firing and pi'oceeded to carry off our goods. They took two trunks belonging to M. Grosgurin, and my own, contain- ing a sum of 82 piastres, besides clothes. Not knowing I was still alive and that I remained in the room, the Siamese put the house on fire. 1 only withdrew when half of the dwelling was destroyed, and our enenvies seeing me intended to end my life, and pointed their guns towards me. But happily their officers prevented them from shooting, saying that it was better to take me alive and bring ma to Nong Khai to be presented to the Prince. At this moment Phra Yot and Luang Anurak Phou Chue rushed upon me, and dragged rae, one by the left hand, the other by the right hand; and had me followed by about 60 men, still armed. They then led me into the canoe. Whilst we continued thas to walk, one of the soldiers showed me two bottles of medicine which he found in one of the captured trunks, and asked if they were smelling flagons. I immediately recognized these objects. They were the medicine whict I had in my box ; I replied that in these bottle there was a violent poison and without difficulty succeeded in getting them. (One bottle contained phenical water and the other iodoform.) With the help of this medicine I was then able to dress my wounds. When going down the river to the rock of Wieng Kraseue, the men of Phra Yot laughed at me at the sight of my clothes full of blood. They said, "Look at this mighty man who carries red clothes." When we arrived at the rock, they disembarked, all the officers and their men landed, but they left me in the o*ao3, with about a dozen of men to watch me. During this time I had got very thirsty and, ssaing that some of these men were warming wa ter, I begged my watchmen to give me some of it to quench my thirst. They then tendered me ur ine in a cocoa-nut shell, saying that it was tea. I took this liqaid and threw it into the water. Phra Yot ordered his men to carry to the fort the arms and ammunition taken from the French. I only could notice eight guns with their belts, and a large basket full of cartridges. They erected two forts on the rock, whereof one on the right bank and one on the left bank of the river. Towards the evening they pjsted sentinels in every directi on and the canoes were kept ready to go down the river, from fear of being pursued by the French. Daring this unpleasant , night, a disorder occurred iu the camp and everybody "-ot up and ran to arms. They dreamt that the French came to attack them and thoy the°m- selves were surprised by this dream. During this distarbanca twj o£ their soldiers fell in the waterjind were drowned. The rain kept on uuooasiugly and.they left me to spend the night oat of doors. Having no other garments, but my sampot and ray jacket full of blood, I begged them to take me ashore or at least to give me one or two straw covers (paillettes) to shelter myself with, for I fait very coM. They refused to render me this service, saying that I was all right in open air. Nexf day the Siamese Commissioner sent me down to Outhene m custody of Muang Kona,a Laotian mandarin. At noon whilst goin^down the nver we met about 100 canoes laden with soldiers and provisions On board of these canoes I noticed four cannons, two of which were of the quick-shooting — 19 — This convoy happened to be reinforcements sent from Nong Khai by the Prince, under the command of Luanij Vichit. In ■ passing my canoe they interrogated Muang Kona who replied : " It is a French interpreter whom we captured and made a prisoner at Kieng Chek.'' Luang Vichit was ordered to accost my canoe, and seat his men to' inquire about my name and that of M.'Grosgurin. Tliey then compelled me to tell Iiow many men we hail, how many were killed during the fight, and many other things of which I refused to apeak in detail. I however indicated the number of our men, but concerning the rest I replied that I did not know, for I was wounded from the first shot. Whilst the Siamese soldiers came round to look at me, some abused me with injurious words, others on the contrary goaded me with tlieir bayonets so as to inflict me two wounds at the left hand. I begged them to leave me alone, but these heartless and merciless men would not understand me. After having writtsn Iiis letter to the Kha Luang of Outheue, Luang Vichit handed it over to Muang- Kona, aud left us to continue our way night and day. Next evening -I arrived at Outhene. I was lauded and left at Khun Tho's, Khaluaug of Outhene. The latter put me tlie following questions : " why do you servo the French and not the "Siamese? What is your name" ? I told him ray name, saying that my country was under the protection of the French, and so I ha(] to work with the Freneli. He ordered his men to carry me to the stables, telling me that it was the best place they could choose for me. After they had put me down iu this awful place, I asked For an old mat, and some- thing to cover myself with, but I met with a refusal. I was obliged to pick up the remains of the grass their horses bad nob eaten, and put them under me to replace the mat. On the left and on the right of my cage were those of their horses. Each time the Kha Luang passed in front of tlie stable, he told me that it was the best room that Phra Yot could build to receive me. Day and night he made h is men watch me, instructing them to keep good guard over me, and that, if I ran away, they m ust try aud catch me and cut my head ofi". Towards four o'clock in the morning everybody rushed to the bank of the river, to see a new wounded prisoner who had just corns. He was ouo of our Annamite militia- men. This unfortunate man arrived at Outhene with two wounds, one in the arm, the other in the chest. Wheu they wanted to carry him to the stable to be with me,, he had stopped breathing. He is dead, so I have been told. The ne.'ct day, very early, the Kbaluang had me put on b oard the canoe that was to take me to Nong KLai. He ' came to watch the departure on the bank ; he sent his secretary and his men with a big chain to bind me with. These men came, fastened these irons round my waist, making them as tight as possible, and. locked the two ends of the chain with a padlock. I begged them in vain to fasten these irons to my foot, because they would not allow me to rest, being fastened to my waist. They forbid me to speak, instead of listening to my request, saying that it was the body that had to be chained and not the foot, for fear that I should be able to tike them off and run away afterwards. I begged to observe that when one has as many wouuds as I had, one never feels disposed to run away. But they refused to allow mo this satisfaction. When the operation was over, they started. I was now under the guard of a Laotian mandarin. In the eveniog I arrived at Suniabury, where I had to be escorted by another canoe with the mandarin of the country. The next day we went on our way up the big river, the current of which was very strong. During this long journey, I took care'of myself as much as i could with the two Uasks of medicine I have already mentioned before. After a few days my wounds began to heal this was what as.sured me that I should be well in four or five weeks. Eleven days after this journey I arrived at Noug Khay. The Laotian mandarin went to the residence of the Prince to give the letter from Outhene and announce my arri ■i cc'rtiUBi_irnoJ_>!i»- j-wn .Sjauiryc unnroacli. ouu i>i whicii is [cnnw.-| innl...- rli,. 20 title of Mom Damropg, chief inspector, the other is named Khun Chasoung, chamberlain of the Prince. The latter gave orders that I shoald be released from my irons, and that I should be taken to the hoase of Phra Boriban, the chief of the village. Night and day I remained under the watch of five soldiers. The Prince ordered that I should be given everything I needed for myself. One day, after my arrival, I learnt that Phra Yot had addressed a letter to the Prince in which he informed him, that oneof his men, called Ime, had taken the life of Grosgurin. The Prince was very pleased with this news, and sent a sum of forty ticals to Phra Yot in order that he should give it to him as a reward. The second day I saw the arrival of the Annamite militiaman. Van Khan, number 350j with his wounds and he was taken to the house where I reside. He had received three bullets, the first of which broke his left arm, the second burnt his forehead, and the third took off the skin of his neck* He was nursed by the Siamese doctor, whilst I nur- sed myself. The above extract, texlttally reproduce from the Cambodian interpreter Boon Chan's state- ment, includes the whole part of this statement which directly or indirectly concerns Phra Yot or the Kieng Chek affair. The remaining part concerns tlie interpreter's visit to Nony Khai and hit journey jrotn Nong KItai to Bangkok where he was handed over to Hie French Minister Resident. I m t I — 21 V. statement of the Aunamite soldier, Nguyen van Khan, taken before M. Duces, presid ent of the Cour d'Appel de I'lndo-Chine, on the 15 th day of December, 1893. (Translated from the French text communicated to H. B. H. Prince Devawongse by M. Pavie.) Ott the 15th oE December of the yeai- 1893, iu conformity wibli the verbal instructions of M. le Gjaveraeur Greaeral and with the request of M. le Miaistru du Franco at. Bangkok, and of the Procureur General, We, Dacos, president of the Cour d'Appel de I'luJo-Cliino, assisted by Mr. Jude, clerk recorder to the Court, and Truoujj "VinU 'L'he, principil interpretar for the Anna mite language to the Court of Saigon, vrent to the hospital of Chagoaan to receive the fol- lowing deposition : — . 3Iy name is Nguyen Van Klian, my age is 25 years, I was born in tlie Huyjn of Tan Sap. I am domiciled at Fhuc Lam (Annam) and I am garde civil iu the Nhge An. 1 am unlettered. I was a private in the detacholent of civil guard under the command of Inspector Grosgurin. We were o rdered by M, le Besident of the province of Vinh to escort and to lead back to the Mekong the Siamese mandarin entitled Chau Khun, who bad been compelled to evacuaie Kham Muon. He was fallowed by a numerous troop of Siamese soldiers who had been disarmed. A fter fourteen or fifteen days of march we arrived at Canh Trach. There, M. Grosgurin occupied a house situated on ilie bank of tiio river with his Annamite boys and an interpretsr oc Camb3liau origin. The men occu- pied two other houses nearly contig uous to that of the inspector. The Siamese mandarin and his soldiers dispersed. I do not know wliib beoima of tasui. Twj diys after his arrival our chief fell so ill that he had to leave the command to his Cai ; moreover we had a feeling of perfect security and we did not expect to be attacked by the Siamese. However, a few days after we arrived, the Huongs who lived near the post evacuated their houses and carried off all their contents from fear of an offensive return of the Siamese. None of us, either officers or soldiers, believed that their fears were founded. Seven or eight days after our arrival at Canh Trach, in the course of the fourth Annamese month, on which day I cannot exactly tell, at three o'clock in the afternoon, a troop of at least hundred Siimese, armed with guns, surrounded our post. On their bein"' signalled by the sentinels, they discharged their guns on the three houses which we occu- pied. At this moment I was on duty at the foot of the ladder of the house occupied by M. Grosgurin. I was hit by three bullets whereof one smashed my left arm, and the two others simply grazed along my skull. I could see six Siamese, two of whom were officers climbing on the ladder ; one mo ment later I heard detonations in the house of M. Gros- gurin, then the Siamese put fire to the three houses where we were posted. My com- rades returned the first fii'ing, but I do not know what were the results of their defence. Being grievously wounded and losing much blool, I took- refuge behind a bush of bamboo, at a short distance from the post. I remained there six days without being discjveioj and without any care or food; I came out of it to wash my linen and my woumis in t'le river; I was overtaken by a troop of Siamese who arrested me; I was imm3diately conveyed by boat to Nong Khai where I arrived after four days of navigation. I sta yed there for 30 days and was attended by a Siamese doctor who folio wed the European system; I saw the Prince who administers the province. He sent me to Bangkok with the interpreter of M. Grosgurin who had also many wounds and had been conducted to Nong Khai; our voyage lasted 30 days. During 28 days we were obliged to walk because of the inundation, the remainder of the time we travelled in ox carts. Two days after we arrived at Bangkok we were delivered to the Representative of Fivince who to)k care of me and sent me to tiaigon. I am since eight days iu the hospital of Chaguau. — 22 — Q.— Can you poiyt out to me some iatefeating oircuinstauces concerning the murder of M. Grosgnrin or the massacre of your comrade f R.— No. Q.— Had you to support ill-treatment from the Siamese f i-om your arrest till your arrival at Bangkok. B.— On the way from Nong Kliai to Bangkok, being hindered in walking by my wounds, I received two blows of a stick on my head. Q.— Have you seen again the Siamese mandarin, entitled the Chan Khnn, since your arrival at Cahn Trach. B. — No; I have not seen bim again. The present deposition was translated to the witness who attested its sincerity. He declared that he could uot sign and we dosed the present " proces-verbal" which we sign with the clerk, recorder and the interpreter. 1 — ?DI).c trial of '|!|ra ^^oi FIRST DAY. " Baj^okoe Times," 24th Febbuart, 1894. The trial of the Siamese subjects accused of having committed crimes against French subjects, at Tong Kieng Kam,on 22nd September, 1891, and at Kieng Chek, on 3rd June, 1893, as provided for in Ai-ticle III of the Convention concluded on 3rd Octo- ber, 1893, between Somdetch Phra Pai'amindr Maha Chulalongkorn Phra Chuhi Ohom Klao, King of Siam (ind the Plenipotentiary of the French flepublic, commenced on Satur- day mdrning, at the Eoyal Courts of Justice, before H. E. H. Prince Bidjitpryakorn, Chief Justice and T. E. Phya Siharaj Dejojai, Phya Abhairouaridhi, Phya Dcvesr Wongse Vivadh, Phya Dhammasaranitti, Phya Dhammasaranetti, and Phya Eidhi- roug Eonached as Judges. Luang Sunthorn Ivosa and Nai Hasbamror acted as advocates for the Crown and the prisoners were defend- ed by Messrs. Page and Tilleke and the Siamese advocates Nai Mee and Nai Kaat. Luang Eatana Yati had been appointed as Eecorder; Dr. Frankfurter and Mr. Sveistrup of the Foi-eign Office acted as interpreters. M. Hardouin (French Consul) and M. Ducos, Chief Justice of the Indo- China Court of xippeal watched the case on behalf of the French Govern- ment, great interest was taken in the proceedings, and many of the best known and most prominent residents of Bangkok were present tliroughout the day. Among these were noticed Com- modore de Eichelieu, M. Jaequemyns, Mr. Fliigger (German Consul), Mr, Rovsing; Luang Chamnong, Mr. Choem Srisaracks and others. The corridors and approaches to the Court also contained a large number of the populace, who appeared to follow the case with the greatest interest. The hour fixed for the trial to commence was 10 o'clock, and the various p.ar- ties to the case were in waiting prior to that time ; but, from some cause that did not tninspire, tlic Jud;>x's did not appear upon the Bencli until close upon 10-30. A hirge amount of time was inevitably, expendi-d upon pieli- minaries, sucli as rending the Decree constituting the Court and the Act of Information ; and later in the day the prosecuting Counsel read a long report from M. de La- nussan, upon wliich the defence I'aised several ol js?ctions, so that not- withstanding a sitting extending over nearly five iiour,-, apparently little progress was made. There ujk, iio.v- ever, no unnecesSiiy delay, and tlie prompt and vigorously decided m in- ner in which the Chief Juctice g.ive his pronouncements, whenever a knotty point arose, created a very good impression. •The Recorder having read the Eoyal Decree constituting the Court, Mr. Page applied fora |)Ostponement of the trial for lOd^iys on the ground that there had not been suiiicient time to prepare the defence since pri- soner's counsel were supplied with the necessary documents. The application was refused. Mr. Page tlien SHid t >at, the Coart iiaviug refu&ed that motiju, ho had to ask whether they wouid be willing to adjoarn, after that day, over Sunday, so as to give the counsel for tlie defence a day's rest. He thought lie tuight say there wse uE tUut day's proceeUings tliu Court Wi.iulil ajjourn until Monday mjruiug. Counsel for tiio prus^culion offored no objection, aud the uppliuatioa was grant- ed. The Prisoner was then brought in and seated in the centre of the Court under guard of a constable. In appear- ance he struck one, not as being the vigorous and determined person one would expect to commit t'le crimss as- cribed to him. Hj h.id, h iwevc.-, coa- siderable resource aud self-cout. ui, aud though at tlie coimiiuncemuut showing signs of nervousuuiis, owmg, uj dou t, to the illness from w lioh liu w i.s sutfij:- ing, he after wurJa t.;k.iibitcd pjrfuut sumj froid. — 2 « The Recorder theu asked prisouer if he had any objection to the presence of any one then sitting in the Court. Prisoner said he had not as did also the prosecution. ' Nai Mee, Counsel for the Defendant objected to Boon Chan the Cambodian Interpreter (who was sitting by Mom Ka^sduin) because his depositions were > to be in evidence in tlint Court, as a witness for the prosecution. Boon Chan then left the Court. The Chief Justice ne^ct asked pnsouer if he was prepared to answer questions put to liiiii, or did he prefer to be represented by anyone. Prisoner said he would, for the presenc, answer for himself, and, afterwards he would reply through his counsel. The Recorder then read the various counts of the following indictment, to each of which prisoner pleaded " not guilty." 1st. — Wilful and premeditated mur- der committed by himself or by his order on a French officer called Gros- gurin. 2nd — Wilful and premeditated murder committed by himself or by his order on an unknown number, supposed to be between sixteen and twenty-four Annamite soldiers, being a part of the detachment commanded by said M. Grrosgurin. 3rd. — Severe wounds or bodily harm wilfully inflicted by himself or by his orders on Boon Chan, Cam- bodian interpreter, and on Nguyen Van Ehan, Annamite soldier. 4th. — Eobbery commited by him- self, or by his orders, of arms and am- munition, as also of the personal effects of M. Grosgurin and of the Cambodian interpreter Boon Chan and of 82 piastres which were in the latter's trunk. 5th, — Arson committed by wilfully setting fire or ordering to set fire to the houses where M. Grosgurin and his soldiers were quartered Prisoner, at this juncture, applied for ing his official accouut of the French seizure of Kammoun. The Chief Justice asked prisoner whether he had his witnesses in readiness, and if he was prepared to produce them. Mr. Page said the witnesses were in attendance, but, as a matter of form, and that there might be no possibility of the witnesses not appearing he asked the Court to issue summonses for their production. Otherwise he would not be responsible for their appearance. The Chief Justice said that if the place of residence of witnesses were near, the witnesses must be produced at once, it would be for the Court to decide if they were of sufficient importance for the Court to be delayed by their being sent for. Mr. Page called upon the prosecution to read the uumes of their witnesses but the request was not complied with. Nai Hasbamror here commenced to read a report from M. de Lanessan, Gov- ernor General of Indo-Cbina founded on telegrams received from Kieng Chek, the s«ene of the fight. Mr. Page objected. The Chief Justice said he could read it, but it would be decided later whether it could be admitted as evidence. At the conclusion o£ the document, at 12-20, the Court adjourned for an hour, for luncheon. Mr. Page, on the resumption of the Court, pointed out that certain documents connected with the case and printed at the office of the Banfftok Times, were being- distributed in the Court, to various people. He did not know how they were printed, but, so far as he knew, they were not printed undor the order of that Court ; and he distinctly objected to their dis- ti-ibution, as they would prejudice pe )ple in that case. He thought they should not be distributed until, of course, they were admitted by the Court to be evidence. The Chief Justice ordered that the papers should not be distributed until they were laid betort the Court, and he ordered the copies r; be recalled. Mr. Page pointed out that the printer had put the Royal Arms on the cover. The Chief Justice — Any man might do that. Messrs. Ramsay are using the coat leave to answer further questions through | of arms ; that does'nt make tliem official his counsel (Messrs. Page and Tilleke and Nai Mee aud Nai Kaat.) The application was granted, with the stipulation that Phra Yot should be kept in custody during the course of the trial. Prisoner wan then allowed to take a seat close by his counsel. Mr. Page applied to the Court to obtain | sick, in .Saigon, two documents from the Mmistry of the | The Chief Justice— Would he hav Nai !lasbamror then resumed the reading of documents purporting to be the evidence of an eye-witness of the events under investigation, when The Chief Justice asked if the witness who gave this evidence was iu Bangkok. Hasbamror said the Nai man was Interior written by Luang Vichit to Phra i produced, but for this illness •' Yot (prisoner) constituting his orders,] Nai Hasbamror: He and one from Phra Yot to Nai Roy, giv- ' broken, and is too ill to e been Yes. has his arm come. 1 don't — 3 — think be can come. The wounded man has given evidence before the Adminis- trator of Indo- China. Mr. Page asked that the advocate for the prosecution should be requested to . read more loudly, so that the counsel for the defence could hoar what he said ; at present they could not hear a word. Nai Hasbamror after reading the evi- dence given by Boon Chan on one occasion commenced to read that given while the man was a prisoner before Prince Prachak. Mr. Pago submitted that the prosecu- tion ought not to read one document be- fore finishing the previous oue. Nai Hasbamror said this was evidence by the same witness. Mr. Page submitted that the depositions of the witness, as given on the same oc- casion, ought to be read consecutively, without break. They ought not, before one was finished to read depositions taken before another official. The question of the relevance of those depositions had been left with the Court, and he submitted that the whole document should be pro- nounced upon before subsequent evidence was read so that a decision as to the relevance of the whole document could be given. The Chief Justice said it>was to the in- terest of the prosecution to read all. If they read only half it would be to the advantage of the defendant. Mr. Pago said the latter part of these documents might contradict something some other witness had said; and that was not strictly relevant. The Chief Justice said it would be open for the defence to use the remainder if they wished. Nai Hasbamror, therefore, recommenced to read the document, and was proceeding to make remarks thereon, when Mr. Page objected, and said he under' stood that thu decree constituting the Court gave an advocate no right to make an argument upon statements as he pro- ceeded. Nai Hasbamror — It is not an argument. The Chief Justice said that, if counsel for the defence objected to the counsel for the prosecution making remarks as he went on, he gave them to under- stand that "if they make this argument now I shall have to allow the counsel for the defence to do the same thing, after- wards." Afr. Page — Your lordship has said e.\aotly what I required. The Chief Justice — Ave there any more witnesses of the fight besides the Cam- bodian and Boon Chan ? Nai Hasbamror — There arc two more, who wore told by soiuo one else. The Chief Justice — Will you call these two to give evidence ''. Nai Hasbamror — No ! bflcausp t-hey wore told by someone else. The Chief Justice — Are there any more besides these, in case yoii may need theui " If so you had better say so, that arrange- ments can be made to bring them down ? —No. The Chief Justice — Are you sure ? A long consultation here took place be- tween the Counsel for the prosecution aud the French authorities after which the Counsel for the prosecution announced that they would require no further witnes- ses. Mr. Page— Your lordship, we are an- xious before this Court rises, to kuovv whether these documents are admitted by ]you, as evidence, or wliether we shall bo heard against their being admitted. T : obiect, on various grounds, to all these I documents being admitted as evidence. Sliall I say I object to them now or at ! some future tims ? I The Chief Jusiico — Will you state your j objection ? I Mr. Pago — Under tlie circumstances I ! ask your lordship to make an order for ' the prosecution to supply me with copies ! of all these documents, in order that I i may have them before me as I make my ' objection '1 The Chief Justice said Mr. Page could bo I furnished with copies, and he would wait ; for his objections till Monday morning. Mr. Page — May 1 also ask your lord- ! ship to make an order that, as the evidence just read has not been recei- ved as evidence, it shall not be publisiie 1 to the world, and that you will issue instructions that the various Foreign Consuls should be written to requesting that they will prevent the publication of any of these documents until, if ever, they have been received as evidence. If you have any objection to this course, I would ask you to givu instructions that it shall be written upon the documents that they have not yet been received as evidence. The Chief Justice — I cannot prevent people talking. It has been heard in open Court ; people go away from here to their homes aud circulate it. Mr. Page — May I ask for an ordej' that no evidence shall be published before you have made an order as to its admissibility, and if any of the newspapers break this order, you will make an order that news- paper correspondents should not be agaia admitted to this Court ? The Chief justice declined to make such an order, but said that, if any newspaper published these papers, the defence could take a proper course against them. Nai Hasbamror then announced that he had no other witnesses, but there might be some telegrams produced as evidence. — 4 — The Chief Justice again pointed out to be proaeontiou that if there were any lore witnesses notice had better be ;iven, that they miglit be sent for. Eight witnesses, who were members of 'hia Yot's party, were then brought into !ourt and bound over to appear when ailed on. Boon Chan, called by the prosecution, aid he was a Buddhist, upon which he ras taken to an adjoining I'oom where, lefore the Recorder, tlie Buddhist form f administering the oath was gone hrongh in front of an image of Buddha. M. Hardouin, on witness' return to 'ourt, informed him that he had now to ive verbally, in reply to questions, the vidence he bad formerly given. The examination of witness was com- lenced by the Counsel for the prosecu- ion, but in order lo facilitate matters, and ive more satisfaction, the Chief Justice irected that, on behalf of the Court, all ritnesses should be examined by the Re- order. Witness said — I was interpreter to M. rrosgnriu while he was accompanying 'hra Tot. M. Grosgiirin ordered me to ccompany Piira Tot, as interpreter. The Recorder — How did you come to now anything about this affair? Witness — ^Tho head man in chai-ge at innam sent for me to come to him. I ras not at that place originally. I was riginally a merchant at another place. went up with two farangs; one was amed Massie. How then did you come to know any* bing about this matter ?^When M. frosgurin had to send Phra Tot from ne place to another he required an in- srpreter. I had no wages. Can yon recollect what month it was ? t was in the month of June last year, 893. Who was it who made you go ; Grosgurin r anyone else ? — M. Luce was the man. Then what happened ? — During the lonth of June— I do not recollect the ay^we had 20 A.unamite soldiers. There as a boy and a cook, besides the irang. There were five or six boys, An- amites. How many of Phra Tof a party were lere whom you were bringing down ? here were about 60 men. Phra Tot's len had no guns ; they had only knives, /'hether they had any in their pockets or ot I cannot tell. Did yon go by boat or land ? — I came 1 by i;iud ; Phra Tot came on the horse, lie rest of the party came the same way, 111 soine ou foot. Whiifc h:ippoueil after that? — 1 do not j'lw what t » reply. Ho IV many days were you getting to iuug Chck?— Three or four days. Were you all sticking together, or were the parties separated ?— Sometimes we went together, sometimes one party in front, sometimes the other. How long did you march at one time .' Sometimes two hours ; sometimes three hours. „, ^^ , Tott did not keep first ?— Phra Yot started first, we started after him. How long about did you take to get to Kieng Chek ?— Four days and five nights. When we reached Kieng Chek we kept the shelter for Phra Tot, because it belonged to him. But who got there first? — We wont first and were there first. Why did you go to the house and not to the shelter ? — Because there was not enough room in the shelter for Phra Tot's people, so we went into the house. Which house was Grosgurin in?— It was a house belonging to a Laos in- habitant of the district. How far off was the shelter from the road? How late after your arvival did Phra Tot arrive? — We arrived at three o'clock; Phra Tot arrived by nightfall. We arrived at 10 a.m.; the others arrived at 5 P.3I. Where did Phra Yot stay when he ar- rived? — He did not stay in the shelter but went past to stay, in another place al- together. It was *an abanaoned place. He put his elephants, &c. there ; below Kieng Chek. Was it on the main road, or was it hid- den away ? — I do not know. I suppose, it was a different way, fronli which we came. It was more than 200 yards from where we were; about 15 minutes walk. After that what happened ? Did not you go to see each other ? — On the journey M. Grosgurin had been ill, two or three days, and we wanted boats to take him to Onthene. Next morning did not either of you two parties go to see each other ? — No ; because the Jarang was ill. What was he sick with '! — He had fever. I was sent by Grosgurin to Phra Tot,' to see Phra Tot and tell him that as Gros- gurin was ill we must wait and get boats to take Grosgurin down comfortably. What happened after that ? What did Phra Tot say to that? — There was no answer at all, Phra Tot kept quite silent. Do you mean to say he said nothing ?— He understood, and that was all. What happened next ? — On the third day two people of the inhabitants came to tell us that Phra Tot intended to run away to Weng Crosen, to make a fort there. Was it women or men who came to tell you ? — Every one who was there came to tell me, as the interpreter. Of course they could not tell Grosgurin as he did not understand the language. They told us he was going to make a fort with a view of fighting the /iirant^s. He also said his people were going about trying to borrow tools, and the inhabitants said they had none to give them. Then I and nine or ten soldiers and Grosgurin took a boat and came and saw Phra Yet. We found him sitting there at his own place, and he asked us what business we had come on. Grosgurin replied : " We have a little busi- What happened ne-xt ? Then Luan^' Anu- rak said : " You are all brigands, you have plundered us at Kaimuouu, now you are going to plunder ,;is here too." Did you hear him say that yoiu-self ? — Yes, of course I did. I have said so on sworn evi- dence already. Grosgui-in took his leave and guarded the body of Luang Anurak, and again gave directions that if he wanted to take seiTants or anythiug else with him he might do so. When we arrived at our house again ness with you." Grosgurin said : "I have Grosgurin gave orders to provide comfortable heard that Luang Anurak has been tcllia<; the inhabitants at Kammoun than the Siamese will soon come back to fight again." Grosgurin did not say these words ; it was only in his mind. When did M. Grosgurin tell you that this was in his mind ? — He told me before we left the house. The people were so frightened that they fled into the jungle. M. Grosgurin thought of taking Luang Anurak, but he did not tell Phra Yot about it. He asked where Luang' Anu- rak was, and Phra Yot called Luang Anu- rak. At this juncture the Court adjourned until 10 o'clock on Monday morning. ' SECOND DAY, MONDAY, 25th Febeitaet, 1894. At the time for resuming the proceedings, on Monday the whole of the Court officials, and the counsel for the defence were present, but the French representatives and the counsel for the prosecution failed to put in an appearance until 10-3.5. Immediately M.Hardouin took his , _ , , , , , , , seat he commenced peruling a long telegram, at 1^°* ^^ ''«'^" ^^^? ,*° ^?-^^ a stockade at the conclusion of which he entered into con- 1 ^eng Krasene ; and they also said that Phra versation with the acting Attorney General ! ^o* l»ad sent a letter to Nong Khai. They upon its subject matter. The Judges constit- ^^^^^"^ that if the French went down to Weng uting the Court did not take their seats untHj ^';^sene, Phra Yot^would fight them, and that, 11 o'clock. quarters for Luang Anurak. I was in oue room, Grosgurin in another, and Luang Anui-ak in another. We wei'e all in one house. On that same day Grosgurin rapidly got much more sick. I cannot recollect what day it was ; June was the month. What next ? — On the afternoon of the fol- lowing day, about three o'clock, a messenger came from Phra Yot. I don't know the man, but I know him to have been Phra Yot's man. He came and asked for the body of Luang Anurak from M. Grosgurin, so that he might be sent back to Phra Yot. Grosgurin replied our boats are not ready yet, we have only five or six boats, which ^vill not be enough for our own party, 19 altogether — our combin- ed parties — to go down. To go down where? — To go down tv Onthene. Wliat happened next? — Tlie messen.'er then said " If Grosgurin will let the mau -^o. that will be a good matter, but if you refuse I think it will break the treaty between us. Grosgurin replied : — Luang Anurak has ^'ut all he wants, and we do not want to keep him as a prisoner in any way. We are only keeping him till the boats are ready. In the eveuiui;- the inhabitants came and told us that Phra ' if the French stayed where they were, Phra Yot The examination of Boon Chan was then re- sumed by Nai Hambamror as follows: — What happened after that F — I told a soldier to take Anurak and put him into the boat. Luang Anm-ak was not willing to go and i struck the Aunamite soldiers. The soldiers I were going to take him by the hand, but he ' would come back, Two days passed, and two nghts, but I cannot remember the day or the month. Phra Yot an-ived in the morning at Kieng Chek. About 9 a.m. we saw about iOO soldiers arrive in the shelter. Did you see the soldiers yourself ? — Yes. Did vou see Phra Yot with them ': JTo. I said, " vou'need not do that"; but seeing that | di"! "ot^^^' P'^'""' Jot. I heard this. howcv,..r. Luang Anurak was imwiUing to go thev were' ^"^ t°Jd Grosgxmu, and he then sent me to ,ee ordered by Grosgurin to take hun by the hand \ ^^at they had come for in this warlike tashion ; and drag him. But they did not do it. j Phra Yot then asked " Wliy do you catch i this fashion : " and I replied that and so I went back. There wore two officers in charge. I could be sure they were ofiicers, from the helmets and the shot guns they can-ied. I asked theiu " ^Vliv are vou coming to fight ?" and the ofiicer replied "The Prince at Nong Kliai ordered us to come and demand the body of Luang Anurak. Did vou see Phi-a Yot among the soldiers ? him in it was because the inhabitants had come and informed him, on the previous night, that Phra Yot intended to go down to Weng Krasene, to make a stockade there. They also said that Phi'a Yot had been send- 1 mg out soldiers to borrow tools from the j — I did not see him then. Phra Yot did m.t uihabitants. The tools were knives and axes j come up till aftenvards. I only saw him for to cut wood with, and that was the reason : the first time when the fighting began. The why I must take Luang Anurak, because I i officer forbade me to come inside the shelter, was afraid he would run away. Grosgurin j and told me that if I did I should be shot. further said to Phra Yot : " You may send his ! I then said " I have only been sent peacefully sei-vant, clothes and food." Grosgurin would | on a message ; there is no need to ti-eat me in take care of hun all the way to Outhene. ! this fashion." My orders were simply to make He was afraid Phra Yot was going to i-un | enquiries and to ask why they brought all away, to make a stockade at Weng ""Krasene. i their warlike preparations. "■ — -- -v I was to sav that — 6 — »if thoy liad come to ask for Liiaui; Anurak's body they were to come quietly without any wa,rlike preparations. The officers said : " we shall go to ask for him quite peacefully, but our Nai Tai is not yet come/' I asked : " What is the name of your Nai Yai," and the officers replied •' It is Phra Yot." By the Chief Justice : Do you know that soldier r — I could not recognise him ; we were tout far ofi to recognise him. because we were more than 25 fathoms away. I then returned and told M. Gros- guriu all that had occurred and that they had said to me. Grosgurin said to me : ■" If they come to ask to see Grosgurin quietly and peacefully we must let them come. We need not make wai'like preparations to receive them if they are going to come quietly." On that day Grosgurin could not leave his bed. On that day, at noon, we saw a number of soldiers, about 200, each carn-iug a Snider rifle and I recognised the same two officers again, and they came and stood a few yards away from our house, with the officers behind them. Phra Yot was down at the lauding. Grosgurin then got up and told me to ask them what aU these wai'likc preparations were for. I said :' •• Don't fire, don't fii'e ; speak together first." Tliey kept shouting " fire," but they had not yet fired. When I heard this I Went back into the room where M. Grosgurin was and then I saw Grosgurin lyin^i- on the bed. We had got no pre- parations for our soldiers at all; they were lying alx)ut anyhow. When I got inside the room where Grosgurin was 1 then heard guns going off. I got, a bullet in my back, which came out at the front of my chest, at that moment. I said to Gro.sgurin: "I am ah'aadj- hit." Grosgiunn replied "I also am hit, on the right leg." I then went out of the room and saw Luang Anurak get out of tile room where he had been, and jump down off the house and go and stand among Phra Yot's soldiers. How far off were these soldiers then ? About 10 or 15 yards ; but the soldiers who were shooting were not more than four yards from the house. The Chief Justice — How was Phra Tot dressed r A iihalai, coat and black trousers. I could not notice at the time what I am telling you now. When did you notice this ? I noticed after- wards, but I saw Luang Anurak carrying a sword. Mr. Page: May I ask witness if he can recognise any of the men whom he saw ? I should like the witnesses now to be produced to see if he can recognise any one of them. I should ask, also, that other i)eople besides our witnesses should be jjroduced, at the same time so that the witness should pick out those whom he recognises, because, if only the eight wit- nesses arc produced, he might say : '• I recog- nise this man and that ; but should 20 people be brought he would liave to pick out those he recognised." The Chief Justice said he did not see the necessity of such a proceeding, and seven of the witnesses only were called. Of these witness recognised one as having gone up into the house. Examination continued: What l»appe- ned next?— When Luang Anurak had been after them I went back into the com- poimd and when I got to the door of tlie compoimd I received a bullet in my lett leg. I saw at the same time that Grosgurin had received a ball through the temple and was dead. Did vougoto see ityourself r— All the rooms were close together and I could see it quite well. Then I saw a man named Klion Bay come by and say loudly : '• I will come and cut off your heads and send them to the Prince at Noug Ivhai." As he was coming up the stairs after these abusive words he was shot by an Annamite soldier and died, but I don't taiow whether it was our soldiers or the Annamite soldiers who killed him. After I had received mv previous two bullets I sat down and promptly received three more wounds, one in the stomach, one in the right hand, and one in the right leg. Then the Sia- mese soldiers came up into the house and carried off all the property that was in the house, M. Grosgurin's boxes and all there was there. About how many boxes were there r — There were 30 or 40. They took my omi hat and several other things. I can remember the names and faces of some of Plu-a Yot's soldiers who came up the stall's. I reeog- j nise Khon Newy as being there but I j did not see him take anything. I recognise j Khon Vichit. Then the rest of the Siamese i soldiers took off everything that was left, and I set fire to the house. I saw one of our men, j one who has not come to-day, go up into the I house. j Were those who lit the house dressed as , soldiers 'r Did you see them, yourself, light 1 the fire with their own hands r — Yes. I • Are you sure they were Phra Yot's .soldiers who did this ': — They may have been soldiers or they may have been inhabitants, but ' they were the people who were sur- rounding the house. In fact they were the people who had been stealing all the ' things. As I saw the house was more than half burned I ran out, as it was too hot to stand. I should not have come out i if this were not so. As soon as I came out ' Phra Tot and Luang Anurak dragged me by j the hand. They dragged me down to the boat. ! They asked me how many bullets I had in me. ' They told n. soldier to drag me down there ; ; and 1 saw one of the soldiers near holding two 1 bottles of medicine. One was iodoform. It was Khon Cham Mon who was holding the bottles and he asked me what was in them .whe- ther it was scent. I said : " that is medicine ; I jjlease give it back to me," and he did so. Then ! one of the soldiers who were in the boats began I to abuse me, saying : "Why was the house set I on fire before we had stolen the things out" ? i Who was it who made these remarks 'r — People, servants of Phra Yot. The jjeoplc in I the boats took things out ; the things out of my ; pockets; eveiything I had. They took me i do^vn to Wieng Kraseue, and when "we got there ■ I saw a stockade of Phra Tot's. I How do you know it was Phra Yot's ?— He I was there and, of course, it was his. There I was a stockade on each side of the river. And iPhra Tot on the arrival, in the evenui"-, went — 7 — Tip into his house, and told the [soldiers to look i Luang Auurak ran out. I htard the firiii!,' after me in the lx>at. ' | coming in front of the house and tlu-iv hhic Did Phra Yot come in the same boat ? — Not j only Siamese soldiers in front. in the same l)oat but at the same time. : Did you say that you had 82 piastrea in your I saw two guns with cartridges and every- box? — Yes. I took no accnunt of what was thing complete Ijelonging to our French party, in theotheii^thingsr -Tht.i-t!jv<'re S'2.50 worth of and Phra Yot took them to his own house. goodsVbut I could not say exactly what there About how many people died on each^side. ^^''s. in the fighting ? — 1 saw many Annamftes die Were these things never given back to you ? but of the Siamese I only saw one die, for ' ^o, never. When I was tent down to the certain. That was Khem Way. ' boat I saw them carrj'ing my double barrelled The Cliief Justice : Did the Siamese soldiers catch anyone except yourself? On the way to the boat did you see any Siamese soldiers wounded or hurt? — I saw none. Tlie next moi-ning Phra Yot sent a Laos man named guns and I knew that it (or they ?) were sent to Prince Prachack. Did you see the Siamese soldiers light the fire? — Yes, I did. I actually saw them.' - The Chief Justice decided that as they stop- Hona Qua to take me in charge down to ped reading this deposition at this point before Oiraiene. | because it was not relevant so now he stopped How long were you getting to Outhene ?— the evidence at the same point and for the One night and two days. At Outhene I was | same reason. sent to stay in the stables amongst the | Luang Suuthorii(C'onuiel for the prosecution) horse dung. The next morning I heard , at this point asked witnrs.s how luii- was the the soldier sayuig another Annamite had I journey from Outhene to Nouif ICljiii. been brought down, but that on his anival 1 ivr„ 't>„ u- 4. i i. 4.1 ■ ^ .» 1 ■ 1,., 1; .1 T^-T • 1- "■""•"" "" ""'""I Mr. Page objected to this inattei- liein:,' car- he cbed. I did not see him myself. We stayed 1 ^ed further. L far as he knew it was not in *r„?. "^l'Jl™,*K''A^^^_H^"i*^'^",*''^ Commis- 1 ^^y^^,, ti^^t pi,^^.^ Yot was sent down to Xong sioner an-angeil boats and sent me down to ITong Khai, therefore uothini; Khai. When I was put into the boat the Com- ' ^^^^^ i^^g ,„^jj ,,j. missioner put an iron chain right round my waist. I asked him to put it as if I were a man but he put it as if I were a monkey. They said they were afraid I should run away. It took between 10 and 12 days for us to reach Nong- Khai. When we arrived at Nong Khai Prince Prachack sent down two men to fetch me up under guard, and they put me into the house of Phra Borikah. Thev were fine soldiers who on that pipiut could innocence. Tlje objection was allowed, the Chief JiLstice saying it would waste time to go further into the point. The Prosecution : But it has to do with the witness for the defence. The Chief Justice: If it Examination continued : from Kammoun to Outhene r 11 . ., ,- 1 ., , , Iv upwards five davs : goinsf guarded me up to the house, and they guarded • f^ ^^^ ,, differeilce whethe me all the tune: day and night. After three „,. i„„.-i days I saw them bun- an Annamite soldier Did you see cause we were been wounded by the trout of his ribs was bi'oken. him yourself ? — Yes be- placed togetl'ier. He had a bullet on one side and forehead. One of his left has raise it then. How far is it — CouiiuL!' C|uick- ilov.-a four days. you go by water or land. Was there enough time for Phra Yot to send from Kaiimunm to Outhene and get sol- diers so that the soldiers shuuld arrive at Kam- moun in time to assist them. Would there be enough time for them to t,'et to Kiensf We stayed there a month j Chek to "help Phra Yot ? Do you mean from and then Prince Prachack sent two people to i the time M. Luce arrived at ' Kamnioun, or take down statements from me. They said : " If from the tune we left ? — If the tirst there you tell the truth we will let you go: if you do 1 would be time. not tell the tnith we will kill you." I then told ! When they were firing did Phra Yot forbid the truth. I -told them as I have given it i them to shoot or not? — He did not order them above to-day. I also heard people saymg that ; to stop. Prince Prachack had sent orders to the other | ilr. Page said, it would be in the lecolkction side of the river that buffaloes and everything ' of the Court that, on Satui-day, certain points should be brought over to this side. Whoever ' as to the inadmissibility of certain documents did not come would be punished. If the as evidence were left to" be argued to-day. His French wanted to take the countiT- at any rate learned friend was now ready to aii,ue the they should not take the people. j question of the admissibility of the statement From Wieng Krasene downwards did you read from M. de Lanessan. anil also the depo- see Phra Yot's men or not ? — When "the sitions of the Aimamite soldiers. "\Vitli regard shooting took place at Kieng Chek did you see : to the Cambodian who had now l>een called Phra Yot urging the soldiers on or not ? — . they would, with the permit siou of tlie Court, I cannot say whether he was urging them : waive their objection, though they were aiiictly on or not. I within their rights in law in raising these objec- The Chief Justice — Did ho urge the soldiers , tions. Whilst ol)jecting to the report from "^1. de to shoot or not ? — He was standing behind the Lanessan as evidence, his learned friend would, soldiers but what he said or ilid I could not see if it suited the Court, now argue the question, or hear. I The Chief Justice was understood to say In your deposition before M. Pavie you said '. that if he should afterwards rule a document a letter was sent to M. Luce was that true ? — out as not admissible as evidence, of course Yes. the rejection would equally involve the rejec- lu vour deposition before 31. Pavie you said tiou of what had been based on it. theSiameseshotfii'st;doyoubearthat outornot ? : Mr. Page said that vMi regard to certain All I know is that the Siamese soldiers were points it did not matter whether they were ill front and that the filing commenced wlien admitted or uot, bur as reg-arded the depositions of the CamlioJiau interpreter, whidi they were willing to admit, he would like the ruling of the Court as to their admissibility, before they Were vou told that M, Grosgurin had orders to study "the best route from the Mekong to Outhene or elsewhere as is named in M. de could be used in cross-examination. He then Lanessan's report ? — No. went ou to say tW, as regarded the other i The acting Attorney General objected to points, the comisel for the defence would very the defence going into this report, as it had . much prefer that they should be argued then ; not been accepted as evidence. " ■' - . ■. .. .1- . .■ I Mr. Page: That is why we wanted to argue the point before ; and I also submit that, even if the documents were in evidence, we could for the reason that it was then half past three, and the Court usually adjoiunied at four o'clock ; and Mr. Tilleke, who intended to cross-examine the witness, told him that his cross-examination would hst over the greater pai-t of a whole day. They Wi're therefore, very anxious not to ask the witness whether any instructions were given, because we might ask the question even if we had not such a'report in our hands, We begin the cross-examination, and then leave off \ might ask him even if this report were not m existence. Cross-examination continued : At ICammouu where did you find Phra Tot ? — I met him in Kammoun. the same day. Did you see him before you started the joiu'- ney or did you see him in anj- house ? — I met him on the journey. What time did Phra Yot start? — Between 9 and 10 o'clock in the morning. Mr. Page, on the Court rising, said he should be very glad to know whether they would adjourn over " Wau Phra" or not, as he had a case in the English Court, on that day, and he wanted to know whether he must put that case off or not. The Chief Justice was understood to say that the Com-t had observed the Christian Sunday, but, they would not observe both Wan Phra aiul Sunday. Tlie Court then stood adjourned until 10 the date on which sent for him? — I do M. not in half-au-hour Cross-examined by Mr. Tilleke: — What day were you sent for by M. Luce ? Counsel for the Prosecution : I object to this question as being irrelevant. Mr. Tilleke submitted that the relevance of his question might appear in the course of his cross-examimition, but he objected to showing its relevance at that stage. He wanted to elicit that M Luce meditated sending Phra Tot out, and that M. Luce sent for hmi. If he sent for Phra Tot ou May 22nd, he (Mr. Tilleke), wanted to shew that he premeditated sending him out at once, and that preparations were made to do so. • Where were you when M. Grosgui-in sent for you as au iuteiisreter? It was not M. Grosgurin, but M. Luce. At this point the Coimsel for the Prosecution insisted ou Mr. Sveistrup, one of the Court inter- ■ pretevs, interpreting the evidence, not being | o'clock the following day, satisfied with the way the evidence for the prosecution had been rendered. When or how did M. Luce send for liim ? — M. Luce sent a man for him. Can you remember Grosgm-in or any one remember. Have you any entiy in any book? — No Tou were in charge of a store. Did vou make any entry of the date in your store book ? No : I now remember it was on May 26th. At this point M. Sveistrup failed to make the witness imderstand the question put and so The Chief Justice asked : What is the reason you (the prosecution) do not allow Luang Katana Yati to be interpreter ? — Because there is a Court inteqjreter. After some cousidemtion the Chief Justice decided that the Eecorder should act as inter- preter. Mr. Tilleke : How many day's did you stop at Kammoun before you began this journey ? I dont remember. Were you jjresent when M. Luce gave in- Eti-uetions ?— No : only in the same house. Were you in the same room as M. Grosyurin and M. Luce when the instructions were g'iven ? I was in the same house but in a different room. Were you told by M. Luce what vour dutv was to be?— M. Luce said he had no interpre- ter and he would like Boon Chan to accom- pany M. Grosgm-m, and to bring Phra Tot to Outhene. Did you know well that M. Luce would send Phra Tot to Outhene ?—Tes. Did you accompany M. Grosgurin to any other place? — ^Yes. THIRD DAY, TUESDAY, 26th Pebhuabt. 1894. At the usual time for commencing the pro- ceedings in this trial, yesterday, there was only a small attendance. Considerable delay was caused by the non-ajipearance of the French representatives until a quarter to 11, On the Court assembling The Advocate for the Prosecution said that Boon Chan, the only witness for the prosecution, was sick and, though in Court, was unfit to under- go a long cross-examination. The ^vitness could not stand a cross-examination lasting over an hour, and he(the siieaker)had to ask the Cqurt whether some of the ^vitnesses for the defence could not be called, so that the case mi 1 i i u n-, i 1 £ made the statement, and that it was would consider what seps|hould be taken fori .^^^tifl^^^^ a newspaper to print it. takmg his evidence by commission. If the | ^ti^e were other inaccu^cies in the same prosecution would give two horn- s notice that i ^ „f ^^j^j.^j^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^ -g the witness was recovered enough to attend, | ^J^ j^J^^^.^ ^^^t this thing being all the Court would at once assemble, as they were ! ,„„„^ /„ ^^^^ ■„„ ,,„,i ,,,„ +„ „=,. +,,„?^,,:„ I they unnecessary post- of course anxious that no ponement should arise.] The Chief Justice, after a short consult- ation, then rose and said the Court would adjourn for that daj', on the understanding that 31. Hardouin would infoim him, at eight o'clock the following moraiug, whether witness would be able to come into Court at 10. He then gave special instructions to the Recorder to see that proper steps were taken for giving all the help and medical assistance, at the ex- pense of the Government, that witness might requii-e. The Court then adjourned. %* The Eecorder requests us to state that he oflScially repudiates any responsibility for the lowed to pass. He had also to ask that this paper should be forbiddtn to go on publishing these inaccurate versions of the evidence, and that the Court would take notice of them by excluding the reporter from the Court. The Advocate for the Crown referred to Section 26 of the Decree, which gave the Court power to exclude or remove persons who inteniipted or obstructed the proceedings. The Chief Justice said this «-ould not apply and, that it the Advocate General had any complaint to make it would he advisable to apply to the Banyholc Tinier to see if they would correct the statement. It was very difficult to get an exact version of what was really in evidence, as two or three languages were being used. Witness himself was a Cambodian, and sometimes used both Cambodian and Laos words, as well as Siamese. versions of the proceedings of the Court con- 1 Then the Siamese and English languages tained in any newspaper whatsoever. i were not always capable of being exactly ti-ans- I lated there being cases in which no parallel ! words could be found. This made it veiT diffi- POURTH DAY, WEDNESDAY, j cult, indeed, for anyone to foUow the evidence. 28th FEBBrAET, 1894. ' On this occasion he woiUd not make any defln- ' ite order, but if any further complaint arose ° he would consider what course should be taken. The Special Court for the investigation He might add that, in future, if editors of the Kieng Chek affair did not sit on wished to know exactly what had 10 — with the witness whilst no rijfht to interfere in his hands. Witness : Tliev led into separate rooms. At the l)ack of "this large room, how many room's were there ? Three rooms, with partitions, and one other. What room was M. Q-rosguriu in r Counael for the defence here produced plans taken place the records of the Court were open, and any mistake could be rectified on application to the Recorder for information. He did not think that the ^mistake was inten- tional, but was due to difficulties of translation, j Mr. Tilleke, (for the defence) — then pro- 1 ceeded to examine Boon Chan, the Camlx)- 1 dian interpreter, as follows: — ! — . •■ j i j As near as vou can remember what were of the house, which witness said he understood. yrfUr words to Phra Tot at Ban Lak Hin ? A ■ He thought it was right, only that one partition distance of two to four fathoms. ; had not been marked. (This deficiency was On the question being repeated witness said, duly supplied.) he did not speak to Phra Tot but he sent a man i Witness :— He occupiwl the room at the lett t*. tell Phra Tot to stop at a resting-place. ' hand comer, looking from the river, and nuui- The Chief Justice in reply to a request that ' bered " 4 " on the plan. There is no partition Mr. Morant might be allowed to interpret wit- in that room. iiess's evidence to the counsel for the defence, ■ How many rooms did the owner of the said the questions asked could be trans- 1 house occupy ; one or two? Two rooms; he lated bv the Recorder but the answer ! only occupied these for putting goods in. must be'translated by Mr. Morant. for the de- ! How many windows were there in the house!- fending Counsel. iTwo, and they were shaped something like When did vou first know that Phra Tot had j doors, not gone to the shelter y That same evening. ; Did these windows go down to the floor r Did y«n tell M. Grosgurin immediately what ! Tes. Phra Tot said ? — Tes. " How were the windows closed, with shutters. Can you remember M. Grosgurin's reply :■ or how ? There were no shutters, they werv He said " I have allowed him to remain in the , always open, shelter, why does he not stay there " r WTiat part of the house did you occupy 'r Who was the messenger" Phra Tot sent to ' The front part with M. Grosgurin. obtain Luang Anurak r I do not know the : On the day of the fight where were you — man. but I think he was a clerk or nephew of , when you knew that Phra Tot had come back. Phra Tot. ; the first time ? Close to the compound of the Tliat man came and abused him on the ' house, staircase of the house r — No. Were you close to the ladder at the timer When that young man said the treaty would : Tes. be broken if Luang Anurak was not released, ' Did you know that Phra Tot was coming what did M. Grosgurin reply r . before you .actually saw him P I was informed The Advocate General : "l do not think he ; that Phra Tot was coming, said the treaty would be broken, but that . Mr. Page here asked the Court to allow friendlv relations would be broken. Mr. Morant to put the questions direct to Witness : M. Grosgurin said that he only i witness on behalf of Jtfr. Tilleke. detained Luang Anurak till the boats were | The Advocate General objected to this course. ready. He was not in chains, and no harm would be done to him ; he would only be taken to Outhene. How many yards from the river was the house you occupied. About 12 or 14 yards. Was the river in front or at the back of the house ? In front. Was there a verandah on the river side of the house ? Tes. Was there a small granan' near this house ? Tes. Did the staircase leading to the house join the verandah Tes. Was the staircase at the end of the veran- dah towards which the granai^- There were three granaries. Tes. and stated that there were two Court inter- preters present. The Chief Justice said he would look into the Decree constituting the Court and, having done so he said that nothing therein prevented anyone acting as interpreter for either side, providing that such a person had not pre- viously given aay evidence before that Court. The Court, further, had no right to prevent the counsel for the defence employing any interpreter they might trust. He woiild there- fore allow Mr. Morant to put the questions. The Recorder was there to hear the interpre- tation given by Mr. Morant and could object if he thought the correct interpretation was not given. The Advocate General asked, as the wit- What was the height of the floor from the ness was a Cambodian, would he lie allowed to yards. Perhaps it The elephants could leading In front I)esides ground P About three might lie three fathoms, pass beneath it. How many doors were there from the verandah to the house ? there was a door and two behind, the stairs. Did these two doors lead into < room, or into separate rooms 'f The Advocate-General here attempted to ask witness a question upon the word hla upon which answei- in Cambodian ? The Chief Justice said witness knew Siamese equally well and might as well speak in Siamese. large The Advocate General then required that Mr. Morant should be put upon his oatli if he was going to act as interjireter. Mr. Morant who said he was an Agnostic expressed his wiUmgness to afiirm, which hJ did with right hand ui>raised. I .*;^°'':«''a'^i»"'tion eontmued :— What time Mr. Tilleke objected that the prosecution had :°o^i„!,f^ ^"^ ■™" •'™'" "«* Phra Tot was ^11^ About 8 or 9 o'clock in the momiitg. When you heard this did you inform M. Orosgurin ? Yes. What did you tell him ? I told him that these people had come to ask for the release of Luang Amutik. Did you tell him, at the same time, that there was an armed force come ? Yes, I told him that 200 soldiers had come. How long afterwards did Phra Yot come to the house, and did you see him ? About two hours. In the interval did M. Gtrosgurin make any preparations to meet this force ? No, these people only came to ask for Luang Anurak's release. At the time where were the Annamite sol- diers !' Behind the house, in the compound. Did any Annamite soldiers guard Luang Anurak? No, Was Luang Anurak in a room with the door shut or locked ? No Do you mean to say that all the time Luang Anurak had no guard over him ? No, except when he was arrested two or three days before. Then when you saw Phra Yot coming did you -tell M. Grosgurin? Yea. Did G-rosgurin see him ? Yes, he did. Where was M. Grosgurin standing when you saw Phra Yot ? He came close to the stairs. When you first saw the body of men ap- proaching, how far were they from you r There were two bodies of men. How far away was the nearest body of men ? Eather more than four yai'ds. How far away from the house were they when you first sighted them ? About 20 yards. Look at this plan and see from which du'ec- tion these men were coming ? They came from the right of the front of the house from towards the river, and towards the front of the granar}', close to the stairs. Was it when the first body of men were coming that M. Grosgurin came to the ladder ? Had he come to the foot of the staircase ? I had never seen him at all, up to that moment. If so how could you have put the question to him ? I did not say I was told to ask Khoon .Wang, I onlv said I was told to put the question why they had come. When Grosgurin told you to put that ques- tion did you put it ? I did. To whom did you put that question? I asked the whole lot of them together, not any- body in particular. Did anybody step forward to answer your question ? No. Do you mean to say that nobody answered your question ? Noi the only thing I heard was " fire, fire." (not set fire to the house.) Did anybody, before you spoke or after- wards, ask M. Grosgurin for the person of Luang' Anurak ? No ; nobody. Was any offer made by M. Grosgurin to give up Luang Anui-ak 't No. When you put that question did Luang Anu- rak come up to the same position as you ? No. When did you first see Luang Anurak come up to the top of the bidder? When M. Grosgurin and I had gone into the room, Luang Anurak ran off the side verandah, by the side of the ladder. Do you mean that nobody caught hold of Luang Anurak as he was leaving the house ? No, nobody tried ; when he reached the ground the shooting began. ; Where were you when Luang Anurak jump- I ed out y We were both together in tlie long room, tiehind the door. M. Grosgurin had gone into the bedroom and I was standing behind the door of the long room. Why did you and M. Grosgurin go inside ? He went in because he was sick, and as he was my master I went in after him. About how many Annamite soldiers were on the house when Luang Anurak got out ? Not one. Where were the soldiers standing when When'they came in iight M. Grosgurin then I'.'fni? -^""^H ^"^P^ ,°" *** t^^e house? I came out to the head of the stairs. ^^. Jo* ^^^ because there were partitions. What position did these men take up? Of : ^'^^'^'^ prevented me seeing, the first body who came up some stood in front About the same time, or simultaneously as of the granaiy and some in fi-ont of the you went in did you or M. Grosgurin close verandah. I this front door? There was no door to close When M. Grosgurin came up to the ladder, ; o"" open, where were the Annamite soldiers? At that I Was it through the door on the verandah, moment some were lying about the house, some : or at the side, that you saw Anurak jump out ? were sick; no orders had been given for them Through the door leading on to the verandah, to do anything. ! Did you or Grosgurin, at that momt-iit i ry AYhat clothes had M, Grosgurin on when he out to your men " To arms ? No : but I hearil came up on the verandah ? He was dressed in the sound of guns going off. Chinese trowsers, but his body was naked. When was the order " To arms " given to How long had he been standing there be- the Annamites ? There were no orders, fore any one spoke r You have made a deposition liefore M. He came out and stood there, to make in- ■ Pavie ? Yes. quiries for himself when they arrrived. In that deposition were the words " I cried Had you changed your position, or where to our militiamen ' To ai-ms ' and I went out- were vou standing at that time ? No. Did you speak to Grosgurin, or did he apeak to you first ? M. Grosgurin spoke first 'r* i To the liest of your recollection what was said? He said "For what reason are they come " ? To whom was that question put ? To ask Koon Wang. Had Koon Wang come up to the stairs when that question was put r No. side to prevent the Siamese from firing." Is that correct ? I did not say so to M. Pavie. I myself did say " aux armes." I was inside the room when I was shot in the back. What part of the house were you standing in ? Behind the door. Wliere were you standing when you called •' aux armes " ? I was towards the back of the house. In iilieUienoe to that order did any of the — 12 — No, camo I house was set on fire and vou came out? !l came back along the long; room and saw soldiers u«m. • up on the house ? None i)id thev take up any other position in ' M.^G^ossuriu lying with a billet through his regular line ? No, I did not see anv. head. . , , , j iu Was that order i-'aux armes," vour owu The President here said he hoped the uoss- or M. Grosgurin's order. I myself initiated ejamination would be finished that clay, oe- and gave the order. cause witness was so sick and weak. ' Mr. Page : Yes, certainly, my Lord. Mr. Tilleke: Did you stop in that same posi AVlieu M. Grosgurin went inside the room what did he do? He went straight on to bed. Did he not go and ta,ke a revolver, or a sword, or a gun ? After I had received my shot I saw tliat he was holding a gun as he was sitting on the bed. tion? No I received a bullet in my leg, and then I came to Luaug Anurak's room, and be- fore I had time to sit down I received another bullet in the stomach. Were you in that room until the house be- ^Didyous^ Grosgurin take that re.ol.er?\l^^^^^^^:^^^^l^'J^J^\i::i Havin,. taken the revolver where did be | -^^-^f J ^«J^«*- „^^ ,^^^^^^^ ,,,,, come to.'' I saw hun still sitting down. x/iu. jiuu o i, .„ j „„a Did he leave that room at a^? No. he did ^^ P"* a Pistol to M. Grosgurm s head and nut wishes us to sti^te that he did not ask how far it was " from Outhene to Nong Khai." What he did ask was how far it was from 0\itheue tu Kanuuoim ; " also that Mr. Page did not object to this question. With regard to the liuUet whiirh B> fortify liis camp. On the morning of the fight vou .saw the Siamese at Phra Yot's shelter, at Kieug Chek, and the officer told you that they came to ask for the release of Luang Anurak, but thev were waiting for their master, Phra Yot. Did Phra Yot ever send any men to ask for the release of Luang Anurak? No. When Koon Wang came into the house with a sword in his hand and abused M. Grosgurin, h»w many bullets had you already received. I had received a shot (laugliter). Fad any firing taken p.'aie then'.' Yes. I liatl heard five or six shots. D'd you know Koon Wang formeilv? Vcs. I hii'l .-^cfn him beforn. 14 — The Advocate for the Crown said that as the witness spoke French more fluently might be allowed to give evidence in that language. The Chief Justice < The witness can si^eak Siamese very well ; it is no use having another inteqjreter. I don't understand French myself. When Eoon "Wang came up the stair with sword in hand was that the first time you saw him on that dav. I only saw. him, the first time, when he came to the house. The Chief Justice: Have you any more witnesses ? The prosecution here read, the following telegram : — T ww'i v^?: iJai^ iwB^' li^i'? d^ TOa^^ •2f^ jfiyi J vsmj iki0} nil ^m■^Ul^ jnifn i'j'iui n^ fiB fv.?j '.'nsin w'a^' ui us fi5?>iMS4KiJj;niyMiJimj iilj?i I'lfn iIm ?in fig nlj iiifi? uraikB^ oiqh n wi u'b^ 1./ ^ .tniTniws lira iieJura viiQWijIviJ iiJ^ wi^ dfjtztfi fi^'i v; u fn m ui ii::nijVi ^i r^ titl^^al;:^ ul'J usfw fiu fiai'saufiiiiJMfi ^'"^ m ur.: .Itjiw 1y(4v,i rih m fiulwi lii i=iinj ura uK^.ra «?4rJw «!)a-; r j>? jitjiw ei\'j ttiW !i!ji-3 i!nijiH?jjj ir;y win r.J^s .luiw Mr. Page said he should like to ask who sent that telegram. The Advocate for the Crown : The Siamese Minister at Paris, Mr Page : I want to be quite sure as to whether it did come from the Siamese Minister at Paris. If so I have no objection to it. The prosecution must take it as coming from that source At this point a long consultation took placv between the members of the Bench, at the conclusion of which The Chief Justice asked the Recorder to read over the evidence given by the witnes.s that morning. This witness signed and thus concluded his examination. Mr. Page said he was in great doubt as to whether, under the Decree, Phra Yot could be* called as a witness. The Decree said that ho could make a statement, which could be used as evidence against him. But it said nothing about the evidence being used in his favour, and if it was not to be used in his favour, but against •i_ 1. ,^ ^>..„,.^-;,. _ 1 "•.,' .^.. .J ^„ I was not to be used m his favour, but against yil^l im im rniH nV «^ iv. W m m m I Mm, he certainly should not call Phra Yot to '''«^^'<._ _y .1 make a statement. Dntil he knew the ruline mii ?B!J Immniiu wi in uiu mi'u li a A t, 4 ' rau ij JsHim j have l«>en sworn to. 6. The said extracts quoted from the re)->ort of M. Luire eonsist to a fjreat extent of un- MSMi-u statements m&dc by jjeople not even uaTae'i " all persons of note of the viUajjes" &c., ■&V. i.-ontainiu^ the gravest charges verj- preju- dicial to ouv client which have nothin;; what- I'V.T to lit) with t'jie ease now being tried. 7. It c"o-.itJiiiiR an all»':jed summary of a letter written by my client to Mons. Luce which let- ter is not piviucad, nor even quoted verbaiiin f^.ni-'i tlie said letter is in the handa of the French authorities at whose instance this prosecution was instituted. FiiiMy, to sum up the whole matter, we say that the document is inadmissible as evidence (by Kule« of Procedure universally recognised) bee; us J it is an exti-act from au unsworn report the original of which is not produced, written by au individual not iMirsoually acquainted with the facts therein contained — dejiending for its facts upon an extract from another unsworn report made by another person the origiual of which is also not produced: this second unsworn report con- taininj: statements of alleged fa;t? made by other persons not even named, such statements harinsf nothing whatever to , do with tile case now being tried, but veiy ]n•"^l^\ licial t<.> the chara .-ter of the accused, and also ci >ntaiiiia>f the summary of a letter from another person, which letter is not pro- >lii'-L'i. Iilorcovcr neither the ](erson who wrote tliv ;e n']^o"^s nor any of the ]>LTSons wh>i ari- responsible for the statements therein ii.utained are produced for the purix>se of that rr.is.<-,'xa .ilnitiou wliicj the defence are on- tirlnd ti' dcu.iud under Sections 10 and 13 of tbt- Royal Pwree under which this Court is hi-iii. anil wiieuce its authority is derived. II. !J.:.' ^.p'.•je■.■;^«u^ Ui the evidence of the A.a- niiu-*e ?oldii'r are : ]. Tiiat under Si'ction 10 of the Royal Decree esiabiishiu'.' this Court and the Procedure there- in. WH are entitle.1 to crosj-examine all wit- n.■s^es prodxiced for the prosecution. Section lO says: — The accused shall be allow- I'l to .-ross-examine any witness heard ag.iinst him. •1. Tliat t'le only reason given by the Proie- ■cution why this witness should not be produced is that he is sick. And to this we answer : — (aj That there is no evidence before the Court of that fact and if it were a fact the Prosecution ought to have produced sworn <-vidence and a doctor's certificate to prove it. fb) If they had succeeded in establishing the fact of the alleged sickness, they should in that case have applied to the Court", before this time to send a Commission to Saigon, jit which l>oth the Prosecution and Defence could be represented, to examine the witness according to §10, above quoted. There has l>een no suggestion that he is too sick to give evidence; it has only been said that i he is too sick to he brought here; I am inform- 1 .1 that the Eoval Treasury would have wil- , liugly paid all cx;K.'UBea of such commission, as | ilL-o lit' .luy, other stjip whiph, might have assis- ' ted iu t,»rowi.ng light on the facts qf this case wlierefore we object to , this deposition li.-ing accv'pted as evidence on the grounds that the Deponent has not been sub- jected lo the cross-oiamiuation to which we are entitled under the Royal Decree and that the Prosecution have not shown sufScient cause why this cross-examination shovild not be admitted either in the Court or hv Commission elsewhere. III. With regard to the dei^ositions of the French Cambodian interpreter we submit that there are technical objections against their being ac- cepted as evidence. But as the deponent is present and thus ojjeu to examination of the Court and to our own cross-examination, we are willing to waive these objections. The Chief Justice was understood to say that the dejiositions were too long and he would prefer that they should have been shorter, and have given the more imi>ortant ix)int8 of the case briefly. At this juncture Boon Chan was escorted out of Court, that he should not have the opix)rtimity of hearing the evidence for the defence and Phj-a Yot was taken to another room, accompanied by the Recorder and Mr. Page and Nai Hasbamror. for the purpose of administering the Buddhist oath. Phra Tot, was then efxamined by Mr, Page as follows : — How long have you lieen commissioner at Mtiaug Earn Mut ? About 8 years. When the French came to Kauiniouii. last vear, how many men came the first day ? With the foreigners, the natives, and the ser- vants together, rather more than 6(1. How many French officers were there on that occasion ? Four. Next day did more soldiers come '.' On the evening of the next day some more came. How many more soldiers came : With the new lot there' were over 200. Were you living in a stockade on that (lay ? Yes : I was. Did the French make you come out of the stockade, by force, or did you offer to come out '! They did it by force of arms and by distinct effort, and I could not withsL.-.nd their ]>ower. As regards myself I was distinctly unwilling to come out. What sort of force did the French use to make you i.-ome out ? They sent some soldiei's in to drive me out from behind and to drag me out by the hands from the front ; and the sol- diers from behind held their bayonets liehind to forct- me forwards out. Befori' yon left Kammoun did you write a letter to M. Lijce '.' Yes. I did. The Chief Justice: Did you write before or after they earner After. Mr. Pagi-: The prosecution say you wrote to M. Luce the letter of which this is a copy ; is that so"/ On the whole I think it is the same, but I think there is some left out. Have you got a rough copy made at the time, by yourself, of this letter ? "Yes, I still havv it. Will you compare that draft copv with this and see in what they differ, if at ail r" (Pro- ducing the rough copy and comparing). There is a difference here ; the words left out are The letter and the rough copy were here handed to the Bench for comparison. The Chief Justice ijointed to a pencil mark on the letter, and asked accused what it meant Phm Yot said it was a mark he put ther ' -17- himself at the tiiui'. It was his private mark. ; get Phra Yot to give bis account tlie same After a close examination of the letter ] way ; and they would go back behind the The Chief Justice instructed the Recorder to make a note of the words omitted. Mr. Page: To the best of your knowled>tai-ted first. 18 — About what distance did yon go vouvself and how many hours 'i Wo went 30 «e»s. I do not know how many hours. I went on for more than an hour, and then I stopped and there wej-e 10 or 13 people came behind. Were there French soldiers guarding them too 't Yes there were four or five French sol- diers, coming too. Our people followed in four or five lots. This was the arrangement all the way down. Were there any more of your people coming after, and were Boon Chan and Gros- giu-in with them too ? Tes, there were. In the particular lot you were in, were there any Aunamite soldiers guai'ding'r No. but after we reached Nan Tern Grosgurin started off first. There were a /aroii;/ and 9 or 10 natives in his party. How many hours ahead of you did they start? answer [?] there were plenty of theFrench still, who had not then started. I went after the one Eiu'opean and 9 Annamitt- soldiers with some of my soldiers. This was so vintil we reached Lat Hin, two or three nights after- wards. At Lak Hin before starting in the morning the Camliodian came and told me that Grosgurin would go first, and that I was to follow. Did they take all their soldiers with theM .'' Yes they did, but I asked them first " Where are you going to stay ? " They said they were going to stay at the new Rest '.' house. What new Rest — house? At Kieng Chek. Grosgurin took all his soldiers away, leaving our party to follow behind. What did you do after tliatr How long afterwards did you start off ■ About one hour later, I followed after. On the aftenuiou of that day, rather after one o'clock, my party arrived. As the French people were stopping at the new shelter, and there was no place for me, I went further down to where there was a vacant spot, where an old Eest- house had once been, and where the ground was now bare. Under whose jurisdiction is Kieng Chek? When I was Commissioner at ICammoun the Outhene authorities considered Kieng Chek was under their charge. How far then did your own jurisdiction ex- tend in this direction? It extended to just beyond Lak Hin, where there were boundary posts. What was the distance between the extreme boundary of Kammoun district and Kieng Cbek itself ? It is about 10 hours journey. When you reached Kieng Chek did you meet Grosguriu's party or did you not? I was under the impression that they were going to the new shelter. I did hot actually see them, but being imder this impresion I went on to a vacant space near the site of a former Best-house. How far was that from the new Best — house? It was about three sens off. The next morning Boon Chan came to see me and asked me why I came to stop in that particular place. I said that I had understood that their party were going to stop at the new shelter, and as I should have no place in which to stay, and as I did not wish to stay in the houses of the inhabitants, fearing it would inconvenience them, I came to this vacant spot there. Then the interpreter went back. The next mommg Grosgurin came with about 8 or 9 soldiers and the interiH-eter said to me " where is Luang Ami- I rak '^ " I replied bv asking '• what is your business," I and thev said " we will teU you directly ; tirst i vou must tell us where Luang Auuralc is. I Grosgurin said somethmg which I could not i understand, and the interpreter also said I something I could not undei-stand. and then ' some Annamitte soldiers seized Luang Aniira,k. When thev caught hold of him the Aniiamite soldiers kicked him, some on the legs and others on his bodv ; and and he fell on the ground, and thev" trod upon him so that he could not get up.' I then got up and asked the interpreter what fault Luang Aiinunik had committted. Then the interpreter spoke to Grosgiii-in. after which he said to me, (ap- parently at the orders of Grosgurin '• Luang Anurak has done something wrong ; wo -will I tell vou about it in a minute." Then ! Grosgurin caught me by the hand and made me sit down, and said to me. I " Luang Anurak has spread it about that : the Siamese would come back to Kammoun in two or three months. It is > through fear that this talk of his will ] cause disturbance amongst the inhabitants — 1 this is why I arrest him." Then Ik; ordered i the soldiers to tie up the handa of Luang ! Anurak. Were Ijoth hands tied, or only one ': By the time that they were trying his hands he was already some ten or twelves yards away. I could not say exactly how he was tied; but he was destincUy made to go forward against his will. Then did they all go away ? Yes they did. On the same day I sent Koon Wang to ask for Luang Anurak from M. Grosgurin. Koon Wang came ba«k and told me that M. Gros- gurin said he had no power or authority to givo him up. In the evening Tow Peeali (a Loas official of the destrict ) came and told me that he had been in the house where M. Grosgurin was, and M. Grosgur- in had said to him '• You need not he afraid any more of the Siamese, we have taken Lueiig Auurak, and are keeping him safely in a room." ' Tow Peeah said that he had himself seen I Luang Anurak in the house. I Can you recollect the name of that Tow I Peeah ? Tes. his name waa Phra Oot- 1 ane. I could identify him. The Tow Peeah also j said that I myself, and some of my officials, ' would also be caught, and that if t went up to get Luang Anurak he (Grosgurin) would I shoot both Luang Anurak and myself. Did you send again to ask for him ? No, I did not. Then, late that night, fearing they would catch me, and that this catching me would he injurious to the dignity of His- iVIajesty the King, whom I was serving, I went away down to Wieng Krasene. This- place was four or five hours distance by water ; by land a little more ; and I went by water. What did you do when you got to Wieng Krasene? I met an official from Optane, with _ some servants bringing provisions, and told theui they need not go on 19 — further, as I was now staying at Wieng Erasene. Then on the next day two officers arrived at Wieng Krasene, naaied Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi. They were officers of Luang Viohit. To what corurmnd did these officers be- long? Originally they belonged to Nong Kai but afterwards they had been sent to garrison Outhene. They brought about 50 soldiers with them and they informed ine that Luang Vichit had seen the letter which I (Phra Yot) had written to Nai Roi To Um in which I had said that Eaminoun had been taken from us, and that we were in the bands of the French. Nai Flak and Nai Tooi said that Luang Vichit, on reading that letter, had at ouce ordered them to come up to demand us all from the French, and to resist that the French should leave the district. They added that Luang Vichit said that if I had contrived already to escape from the hands of the French, we three were to | consult together as to what measures to them up. When I saw that they refused to give up either Luang Anarak or any of the things, I then called Luang Anurak to come to me. At that moment the Cambo- dian interpreter spoke in a foreign language to Grosgurin, which 6f course I could not un- derstand, and at that moment Grosgurin turned round to go into the house and spoke through the door to some one — I do not know whom — in a language I did not understand. Then an Annamite soldier ran up the ladder, and went into the further door. As the An- namite soldier went into the further door Grosgurin turned round again and caught Luang Anurak by the hand, in order to drag him into the room. At the moment when Grosgurin reached the door, having caught Luang Anarak by the hand (trying to drag hira into the room) the Cambodian interure.er rm up the stairs, up to the Siiiue door. .\t that moment Luang Anurak dragged iiis h.ujil -i\v.i.y j,ii I, ja:iipi.ig, down off the houa.j, i\\,a lj m^. .\t the moment wlieu Luli.ii..; .inuiak reached ma and ; take in order to insist upon, and to effectual- 1 1 turned to see if the fantiij and tha iiitor- ly enforce, the French evacuation of the ; preter were still at the door but they were territory. I then told them that Luang j not to be seen, and there .vai a sound of Anurak wms still in the hands of the i shooting coming from the French, —coming French, so we consulted as to how we should from the door of the Iiousl'. obtain Luang .Anurak. On the same day we, accordinirly, started off. together with over 50 soldiers ; some went by land and some by water. About 11 o'clock uext morning we arrived at our old stopping place at Kieng Chek Then I and Nai Plak and Nai Tuei went on up to the new shelter and we agreed • Cue of my soldiers who i-.iuii' from Korat. who was uear the tree, was hit iu the stomach. and fell dead. The soldier who died was standinif about six feet from ma iu a st:-aijj;lit line from the door, and standing 6 feet distiuice in front of me. After that there were two or three shots fired. I think two of our soldiers died from them, and while this was h:ouhj ou together to send Khoon Wang up to ask for . I forbade our soldiers to fire, but, seeing that the person of Luang Anurak, and the arms ' 'ihe shooting did uotstop.Nai Plak and Nai Tuey and the other things which they had taken ! and I told our soldiers to shoot in return, and from us. Then Khoon Wang started off, and j then the shootmg was coutiuucd on both sides. Nai I'lak, Nai Tuei and liyself went off up i WhUe the shootiug v,-as goiug on I saw that to where the Freneh were stopping. When we got there I saw Ehoon Wan^ standing at the foot of the ladder, and the Cambodian interpreter was standing at the foot of the ladder too. Grosgurin was standing on one side of the top of the ladder and Luang Anurak on the other side and I saw the fire had broken out at the back of the house where the farang lived. When nearly all the house was ou fire, I saw the Cambodian interpreter come nmning out to Luang Anurak and cry to hini to help him to save his life. I then told Luang Anurak to order the soldiers to surroimd him, and to the soldiers of the French party standing I *<> uo harm to him, and to convey him in a row near the side of the ladder, and . ^""^^ *» tli« ^ater. I thmk about 5 or 6 and scattered near the house. Theie were ' °' "'.^' ™'^° ^^ '^'^^ t'™™ '^'"' French shots, several Annamite soldiers up in the house <=,°"^*™^' i^o""^ Wang. There were, besides. Then I heard Khoon ' "'■''"^ °'' ^°^ ^^^ wounded, who eanie awav Wang ask for''the person of Luang Anurak, : ^"'' "is. I conveyed lOioou Wang's l.odV and the interpreter, after speaking to Gros- f °°& 7^^^ ,f • ^^"^ I ^'^'^'^'l, =•" "."■"• ^V''^'-^"''" down mto the boats. At that time the Hre was still burning; the house was not vet con- sumed at the time. Wlien the interpreter had come out of the house it was not yet fuUv on fire. The Chief Justice. — After the shooting had all ceased did you not go into the house to see if there was any one sick and womided ? No, I did not go and examine them at all. I merely called back all our men. Then we went on down to Wieng Krasene. Did you collect any weapons or guns or things P The guns of five or six soldiers of the French were taken by my soldiers, that is all I saw. Were anythings taken other than arms and weapons ? No it was impossible to go up into the house ; the flames were already too hot to itself, running about. '" ' " ■ on interpreter, after speak: gurin in a foreign language, turned and said to Khoon Wang " Grosgurin says he has not power or authority to give Luang Anurak up. Khoon Wang went on repeating his request for Luang Anurak several times, but he only received the reply that he was not to be given up. As the delivery of Luang Anurak was thus persistently refused, Khoon Wang went on to say — as I had instructed him to do — that he must ask for the guns and other weapons which the French had taken from us, and that the French should leave the Siamese territory. The Cambodian interpreter replied " We shall not leave this territory, and, as regards the weapons and other things, M. Grosgurin has not brought them with him and therefore cannot give — 20 — endure, when the Cambodian interpreter had | Affair, before H. K. H. Prince Bi^jitprya- jumi.«,l off the house. | korn, Chief Justice, and T. E. 1 hya Whfu you reached Wieng Krasene what did I siharaj Dejojai, Phya Abhaironarithi, ii'tiya jou do ? We sent on tie interpreter to Outhene. I did not do it myself. I still stayed at Wieng Kriseue. Luang Anurak had told me that, Devesr W'ongse Yivadh, Phya Dhamma- saranitti, Phya Dhammasarauetti, and Phya KiJhiroug Ronachet as Judges, re- whilf he was under guard in the house at I ^^^^^^^^^,1^^ j,^ Monday at 10..30 A .M. Kifug Chek, Gi-osgurin had sent off a letter ,„ „ p|,ra Wooteekarn Bodhi, Chevalier Kean de Hooj^erwterJ, .Mr. Choem Sri asking for more French soldiers to come and helji Jiim. This is why I left Eieng Chek in such a hiirri.- after the fight. I sent about seven people under two Bang- kok uiHuers to go back to look after Tarious matters at Kieug Chek, and look after the corpses, etc., and the wounded that were there, and aloo to bury the bodies. I told them to mik" a special grave for the /aranj. On the next dav. or the next day but one, they tame baci^ mid told me they had b.uried the bodies, and that they had got the guns of the Annamite soldiers who had died on the spot and in the jungle, aud they had brought down one' An- namite man, too. There was another soldier sent. And what was the name of the one who came first ? I cannot remember, I started oS on about » three hours' journey to leaving directions to my soldiers to bring on the Annamite soldiers who had been sent down first. I met Luang Vichit at , and Luang Sararacks, tlie Rev. Dualap ami several others, Europeans and .Siamese, were pre- sent througliout tlie day. Boon Chan, the Cambodian interpreter, was present ; but Nai Mee said tlie defence would not re- quire him at present. The Chief Justice said Bjou Chan could leave the Court, and he would be called wlien wanted. M. Page said that, as the Chief Justice had o-tauiiued Phra Yot so fully, he had only about a dozan questions to ask. Mr. Page then examiueJ Phra Yot as follows: — When you were Commissioner at Kam- moun and Kham Kurt Luang Vichit was over you ? Yes lie had authority over me, because he was third in the province. Prince Prachak was the first aud Mom Chow Pratana was the second. At Kieug Chek, on the day of the the Annamite soldiers Yes ; they Vichit arranged for sending on the Annamite soldier to Outhene. After having had a talk with Luang Vichit, and telling him all that had passed, I started back again aud on the way up I mi;; the second Annamite soldier coming | ^nh 'ing, were down just below Wieng Krasene. I met him ; drawn up in battle array ? in charge of two Siamese soldiers. He also : were st inding in array. was wounded. ! Had they guns in their hands ? Yes ; Did you ask where they found the Annamite , they had. soldier? Tes, and they told me that they | You said yesterday, that you saw found him behind the house, when they were ] ^^.^eral AnnnMiito soldiers moving about looking for the dead bodies and the waipons of , ;„ ^j.^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^° the dead in the lungle ai'ound, as I had told . ,. , t u ,. ~' . ., them to do | soldiers ? I could not see suflttciently I sent a letter in by the two soldiers who i distinctly whether they were soldiers, went in charge of the Annamite to Luang ; They might have been servants. I could Vichit. while I went on back to do my duty ' not say. at Wieng Krasene. , How was Grosgurin dressed when he How long were you at Wieng Ki-asene? was standing on the verandah? He had Seven or eight days there, and Luang Vichit a white coat and white trousers on. sent up word there to go and make the stockade i Did you, at any time, see Grosgurin, at KvMis C"f . ani th.u I was Wn-e for more , ,,i,„,„if shooting ? Yes, I saw liiu. shoot- tjiui i mouth. -ittor that Liiing vichit sent tor ;„„*,.,„ ,,-n ■ i 1 „ J ®ii. -ii. .• . ing rrom out the window, me to come down and consult with him at ^rr ., r, , ,• . ^ Outhene. This was before any final arrange- ' ^^^'"^ .*''^ Cambodian interpreter and ment had been made. I was about 20 davs «'"'^sg'"'in shooting at the same time ? The at Outhene aud then I came down to Nongi *-"""°°'i"'^. interpreter was shooting from Khai. I stayed a little more than one month ; *h6 same window, but they were alterna- at Nong Khai, and then I was told I was ting, one after the other. -Sometimes wanted at Bangkok. ! they may have .shot together. Since the fight at Kieug Chek_ did you ever Did you see any boxes belougino- to M. receive any letters or orders from Luang Vichit? Tes, I received many. Were they addressed to you yourself ? Tes, some were. The Court then adjourned, at four o'clock, till Monday morning,, at ten. SEVENTH DAY, MONDAY. 5th Makch, 1894. The Special Court instituted for the xne special uouri insiiiuieu tor the! Did von sbr an «• nf »/».,.. _ i — In trial of tho.se concerned in the Kieog Chek [t . it ? No, Idid not. ^ ' ^ ' ^"^ Grosgurin, after the fighting was over ? No, I did not. Did you yesterday say that a special grave should be made for M. Grosgurin ? 1 gave orders for all the bodies to be buried, but a special grave was to be made tor M. Grosgurin, with a roof and a name board over it. Did you tell auy of your people set fire to that house ? No, I did not. Did you t) — 21 — Did you see any ill usage of the Cambo- dian interpreter after be was captured ? I saw nobody do anything of that kind. Mr. Page : Now, with your Lordship's permission we will produce a model of the house and ask witness to place the men in position before your Lordship. An excellent model of the house and its vicinity was here produced, and caused some amusement on the Bench. Mr. Page : Do you understand this model ? Yes ; I think it is correct. Will you take one of these toy soldiers and place it in the position in which you first saw Khoon Wang. The house was situated so that it faced the river. Khoon Wang was put at the ladder end, on the ground with Phra Yot, Nai Plaak, Nai Toie and their soldiers a short distance away, at the same end, M. Grosgurin and Luang Anurak on the verandah and Boon Chan -at the bottom of the steps. The Annamite soldiers occupied a position close to Koon Wang. A picture of the scene as described by the defendant was also handed in by the defence, corresponding with the position of the figures as given by the defendant. Mr. Page : In which direction does the river run ? The witness showed that the house stood on the right bank of the stream. By which path did you come up ? From i down river below the house. The Chief Justice then examined wit- ness as under : — Who gave the order t<\ fire ? As the firing did not stop, we three consulted together, and agreed that we must return the fire, and so the order was given to shooi;. Yes, and who actually gave the first order to shoot, for it is always the custom for one single person to give the definite order ? Answer, exactly, my question, do not evade it or try to avoid any blame or praise on the matter. I gave the order, and Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi ordered too, we all ordered at the same time. On the way up to Kieng Chek did you believe that you actually were head leader of the expedition and in command of the soldiers, or that who was ? What was your own belief on this point ? Luang Viohit sent Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi to go, together with me. Did you, yourself, command the sol- diers, or did Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi ? I understood, that I had command over my own men, and Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi had command over their men. When you and Nai Plaak a nd Nai Tooi gave the order " shoot " who first began to shoot ? Was it your men or Nai Plaak's men or Nai Tooi's ? Could you notice? Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi's men began shooting . Some of my own men shot, afterwards, too. Cross-examined by the Advocate Gene- ral (Luang Sunthorn) : — On what day of the month was it that the French took away your weapons; do you remember ? On the 23rd of May. Did M. Luce come there too ? In a letter, somewhere, I saw the name Luce, so I suppose it was M. Lace. Did M. Luce say to you as follows : — "' Ab you have compelled me agonist my " will to use Tiolence against you when you "refuse to accede to my arguments and to "leave willingly and in a proper way, I will "immediately gather all necessary means of "transport to convey you to Kieng Chek " with your party and with all your belongings. " I will give you as escort an inspector and civil " guards in order that you shall not have difficul- "ties during your voyage with the inhabitants "who do not like you. Remove all your goods " in my presence in order that it may not he said " that you have been robbed by my men." When M. Luce said this we were already out of the stockade, — and our things had already been taken. Who took these things ? The Annamite soldiers did. Do you mean to say that'you had nothing at all with you when you left Kammoun ? We only had actual food, and a few odds and ends of no value at all. All things of worth had already been taken. Were you aware at Kammoun that the head inhabitants of the district had brought charges against you to the French people? No; I knew nothing of this. On the 23rd, when M: Luce came to see yon did M. Luce say to yon : "I will send some soldiers to go with you, to protect you against the inhabitants"? No ; he said nothing of the kind ; he only .asked me what time I was going. I said " I have no orders to go ; so I do not intend to go at all unless I am forced." Before you left Kammoun, did M. Luce tell you that they were sending soldiers along with you ? No they never told me anything. On what day did you send the letter from Kammoun to Nai Eoi To asking for soldiers to come and help you ; the letter of which you told the Court last week I mean ? I cannot remember, the day. The Chief Justice : The witness did not say, before, that be had asked in that; letter that reinforcements should be sent - he only said that the letter gave a n ac count of all that had happened. Cross-examination continued — What did you say in that letter, then ? I said all about the French driving us away and taking our things and so forth. Nothing else ? I do not remember it ia so long ago. — 22 — Did yon write this letter before your otber letter to M. Luce or aftei' ? I cannot remember which. On the day of the fight when you went to ask for tlie , release of Luang Anurak wliy did you bring so many as 50 soldiers, as you said in evidence last week? It is tlie custom in ail jungle travelling that the master _ should be accompanied by many people, on any expedition. The followers are useful to provide against daugers and difficulties on the way. Did any one go with Koon Wang, when he went to ask for Luang Auurak, or did he go alone ? The order to go was given to Koon Wang only, but I do not know whether or not he took anyone with him of his own accord. Did you not order Khoon Wang to take any one with him ? No, I did not. Show, on the model, where the fire first broke out ? At tlie back of tlie house ; here- (The spot W!is indicated by the witness, on the model] Where were you ihen standing? At the same place us at the outset, as I ex- plained in my evidence. * At tliat time had the French soldiers already stopped shooting ? No, the shoot- ing was still going on. Where were these French soldiers ? They were at the side of the house, and some behind and some all round. When the Cambodian . interpreter left the house, how mucli of tlie house was on fire ? About half of it was in flames, on the roof at least. That was what drove the interpreter to leave the house. From where you were then standing would yoa have seen if aay soldiers went up into the house ? Yes, I was near enough to see, but no oue went up. The flames were already too hot. In your evidence you said that you stood there till the house was burned out did you not ? Yes, I did. Would it have been possible for anyone to go up into the house to get things out of it after you had left ? I think it would have been exceedingly hot up there. The flames were terrible ; past bearing I should think, myself. When Boon Chan came down did yon see if he was wounded ? I did not see whether he was wounded but I saw blood flowing from him. Did you hear the evidence given by Boon Chan, in Court, that Khoon Wang was first seen by him with sword in hand at the foot of the stairs. I daresay it was said by him in evidence. But it is not my affair what he may have said. In your own evidence yon said you saw Grosgurin and the Cambodian interpreter shooting. Where were they shooting from? I saw them shooting from the window. Where were you standing then ? I was standing at the old place. Did you not move at all ? I may have taken one or two steps in one direction or another ; as any man is likely to do, even when one says he remains in the same place. When the Cambodian interpreter and Grosgurin shot, what guns did they use ? Six-shot gnns. Could you see both of them ? I could not be sure of Grosgurin's weapon, but I am sure of the Cambodian interpreter's. If they wore both shooiing together at the same window as you said how was it you could be sure of one man's weapon and not of the other man's ? I did not happen to notice ; the firing was rapid and the excitement was general. Were you aware that the Laos inhabi- j tants did not like you at all ? No, I did i not know it. i Did no one ever tell you? No, no one i ever did. When the shooting had ceased and you had gone to your boats did anyone tell you how many had died of your men and of the Annamites ? I was told that five of our men had died but I did not then heai- how many had died on the other side ; no examination had been made. When you went down from there to Wieng Krasene Luang Anurak came too ? Yes he did. How many days passed before you knew how many Annamites died ? I don't remember, becailse I sent up from Wieng Krasene and I don't remember how many days elapsed before they brought me word. Who was .it who went and actually told yon of the numbers of Annamites dead ? The people whom I myself sent up to find out and to bury the dead. How many did they say ? I think they said that over 11 or 12 had died. After the afiair had you sent any letter to Luang Vichit, or how did Luang Vichit know of the affair ? Nai Plaak and Nai Toie went on ahead first and I met him afterwards. Before you met Nai Toie and Nai Plaak you say that yon had sent a letter to- Nai Roi To. Had you yet received a letter from Luang Vichit in reply ta yonrs ? I received letters continually from Luang Vichit on government business. To which particular letter do you refer ? To that letter. I received so many letters from Luang Vichit giving me instructions that I can- not say that I received or did not receive a letter at that particular interval. Do you mean that you did then receive an answer to your letter? I cannot i«member that I had then received any particular letter or not. 23 — In the official letter which yon received what orders did yoa get ? To make a stockade and resist the advance of the French. Mr. Page: — The orders given were contained in a letter from Luang Vicliit which we have put in as evidence. The prosecution can see for themselves wliat is in that letter. The Chief Justice: — I must ask the pro- secution to coafiue tlieir enquiries to the contents of letters bearing directly on this affair. According to your own idea of the con- tents of (hat letter what were your orders ? What letter ? 'I'hat letter from Luang Vichit. I can- not remember the words of it. Mr. Page : — The letter is before the Court; the Judge and not the prisoner should decide on the meitning of any document which is before the Court. The Chief Justice : — We ask that the prisoner should say what he nt the time understood that letter to mean. I understood it to mean that we were not to leave the territory. Did the letter then not tell you to attack the French ? N^ai Plaak and Nai Toie only ordered me to resist the French coming any further, for when the letter was written Luang Vichit only knew about M. Luce taking all our party under guard, so the order in the letter could not have borne upon what we were to do under the vew circumstances. Nai Plaak and Nai Toie consulted anew with me about any new steps to be taken. The Advocates for the Crown here contended that their question was : '* The letter then did not order you to go and attack the French, eh ? " and that the defendant answered "No" to this ques- tion. The Court decided that the word "No" had not boon spoken by the witness but that he had answered : " when the let- ter was written Luang Vichit only knew, | etc., etc., as above. j The Court then said that if the Ad- 1 vocates for the Crown were still in any | doubt they could of course ask the ques- < tions once more to get certainty. | Did that letter order you to attack the French or not ? I do not know, but Nai Plaak and Nai Toie ordered me that if I had succeeded in escaping from the French I should insist on the French leaving Siamese territory. I do not understand to what letter the question refers. Did Nai Plaak and Nai Toie give you orders (at the time that they told you to drive the French out of the land) as to what you were to do if the French refus- ed to go out of the territory? Nai Plaak and Nai Toie simply said that if I had succeeded in escaping from the French clatches Luang Fichit said that we three j should consult together for making ar- rangements to effect the evacuation of the territory by the French. If they would not evacuate what v/ere you to do then ? This was left to my own discretion of what would be^t serve the Government service. After the firing was over did you send any letter or repoi t to any one 7 . When I returned back to Wieng Krasene, I then sent a letter to Luang Vichit giving him an account of what had hap- pened. Do you mean then that you wrote no report to anyone ? As regards this I sent a letter to Luaug Vichit as I have said and alter this there was, of course, further official correspondence between myself and my superiurs on all sorts of Govern- ment mattei's that arose. Did you then give no one an account of what actually happened at the fight ? Nai Mee objected to this repetition of the same question. It could only muddle the defendant and could have no advantage. 'After the fighting I sent the account to Luang Vichit as I have said aud 1 sup- posed that be sent it on to the Ministry of the Interior. Did you tell Luang Vichit how many Annamite soldiers died or were sick ? When I reached Luang Vichit and told him of the affair my men had not yet come back fiom burying the bodies and finding out details. I could only tell him how many of our own men had died. In the letter which you sent to Nai Eoi To at Tar Outhene did you tell them that the French had taken all your property and things ? Yes, I did, I told them the French had driven us out and taken our things. When you reached Kieng Chek did you then know whether Grosgurin had brought with him the things that had been taken from you at Kammoun ? I do not know whether he brought them or not. All along the route did you never see any of the things which had belonged to you ? As I Was coming Grosgurin was on an elepliant, what he had with him on the elephant of course I do not know. I could not see. When Khoon Wang wont to ask for the guns and that the French should leave the territory was he using your words? It was the words of Nai Toie and Nai Plaak who had told me that this was to be said, and I in turn gave orders to Khoon Wang to say these things. This concluded the cross-examination. Mr. Page then said in reply to a ques- tion of the Court that he had no further questions to put to the defendant. The Chief Justice : Kow many letters have the defence applied for ? Only two. And do they want any more ? As the 24 — Jefendaais' otu cvidouce is now finished does he wish to put in any further docu- ments ? Mr. Page : I would wish to consult with ray client before deciding. The Chief Justice* The request is a very reasonable one, We will grant you until to-morrow morning to decide upon it. Mr. Page: Would it be Your Lordship's 'pleasure to allow Luang Anurak to tell his own story, or shall I take him shortly. The Chief Justice : We will take him in our ordinary way as his evidence is so important in the case. Luang Anurak, examined by the Chief Justice, gave the following evidence : What is your name and rank, and De- partment ? I am in the Ministry of the Interior. My position was assistant of Maang Xakon Sawan. How long have you been in ofiSco with Phra Yot ? As long as lie has ? I began my official duties ac the same time as Phra Yot What was your definite duty when you went to Kammoan ? I was his assistantt In what matters ? In all official matters, and in all matters which he had to execute. Did yon see what happened when the French drove out Phra Yot? Yes; there were four or five Europeans, and 50 or 60 soldiers. The French told Phra Yot that they had received instructions that the territory of Kani Kurt and Eammoun belonged to France, and that the Siamese were at once to evacuate it, and that Phra Yot was to take away his soldiers. What did Pbra Yot say ? He said that ' he had received no instructions yet, and I could not go. ! The French then said : " If do uot SCO we will arrest Phra end send him to Annam. On the next day after that, the French raised their Aug and saluted it, and their sol- diers surrounded our stockade ; and they took the gnns and all things out of the hoases which stood outside of, and ' near the entrance to, the stockade, and carried the occupiers away along with those of our men who did not get into the stockade in time to their own (the French) stopping place. Why did you not make any preparation to resist the French ? Because we had received no instructions from any one. What happened next ? Some French then came in addition. — I should think 200 or 300 in all— counting the former lot. Our food, water and things were all out- side the stockade, and we could not get anything. They refused to give us food or water. At that time it was only by the Merit and good Fortune of this king- dom and of His Majesty that rain fell, and we thus obtained water to drink. The French went into the stockade, and went up to Phra Yot's house and drag- ged him out, pushing him out from behind with bayonets, and driving out all who weie inside— men and women— taking away all the things, of all kinds, that were there. They put Phra Yot and all our party into a big granary. Soldiers were guarding us all the time, and we could not go out. After two or three days Phra Yot wrote the letter protesting against the French occupation, and made me and Phra Pithak take it to M. Luce ; and he made the Cambodian inter- pieter read it, and I think he said nothing in reply. The next day, or the next but one, we left Kimmoun; and on stHrting the French made PUra Yot break up our people into lots having French soldiers with each lot. After Nam Tern the French went ofi" first, and the French aoliliers still guai-JeJ as. Aff.pr three or foar Jays we reached Lak Hin. On t!ie day we arrived no- thing import.iat happened, but on the next morning — The Chief Justice : When did you ar- rive ? We arrived in tho evening, and the French stayed iu, a house there, and we stayed near this house. The Chief Justice : Did the soldiers still guard you at Lak Hiu ? Yes, on the next morning the Cambodian interpreter came to see us, and told us that the French would start off first, and we were to follow on. Phra Yot asked: " Where will you stay" and Boon Chan replied : " We shall stay at the Rest-house ; " and so they started off- The Chief Justice : Did they all go, or did they leave souie soldiers to guard j yon ? They all went ofi"; we were not you I afterwards guirded. Phra Yot then led Yot i us along to Kieng Cliek, and we stayed (at Kieng Cuek), at the site of a former Rest-house where tlio ground was vacant. The Chief Justice : How far was this site from the place where the French stopped ? I could not say exactly. It was some considerable distance. On the next morning Boon Chan came to see Phra Yot. When Boon Chan ar- rived I was just going down to bathe. I did not hear what passed during the conversa- tion,but Phra Yot told me afterwards about it. I believe Boon Chan asked why Phra Yot had come to stop in that particular place ; and that Phra Yot replied that he stopped there because he knew of no other vacant spot since he under&tood that the French were stopping at the new Rest- house. Boon Chan then left, and the next morning a /or-OH^ and nine or ten sol- diers {the/arang who afterwards died (Mon- sieur something), came, and Boon Chan, too. They brought guns with them. Phra Yot asked : " On what business have yon come ? " Boon Chan replied : " you shal — 25 — Tsnow in a minute." Boon Chan then spoke to the farang. and then said to Pkra Yot : '•"Where is Luang Anurak ?" Phra Tot said: "That is he, sitting there." The farang then said (through the interpre- ter) " Luang Anui'ak is a bad man," and the farang and Boon Chan talked to the Aunumite soldiers words which I could not understj,ni1, and the soldiers then came and surrounded mo and seized me, as I was on the point of getting up. They knocked and kicked me and beat me and trampled on me, preventing me getting off the ground. I thus lay on the ground helpless. Then tiiey took string and.bound'uie, and I saw Phra Tot beiu<' held by the f.iranij, and the women and people round crying and gesticulating. As they were driving me down to the boat I could not walk properly — they had trod on my feet. I was sore all over but they sjioved and pushed me along cruelly. Then they put me at the place where they were staying on that day. While I was in a room thero were four soldiers guarding me during my sleep, standing at my feet. I was never out of their reach On that day — I forget the hour — I was thus under their close guard in my room, I overheard the sound of Khoon Wang's voice asking that I should be given up. I could not hear distinctly what was said, but I could hear that they refus- ed to give me up, and told Khoon Wanj?' to go away without me. On that day Tow Peeah came to see the /aran^ and the farang told Tow Peeah that if Phra Tot or any one else came to fetch me* away, he (the farang) would shoot me, and shoot Phra Yot too. The farang pointed and added that Tow Peeah and the inhabitants need no longer fear me or the Siamese, as he was now going to keep me as safely shut up in that room, there, as if it were a real prison. At that time I saw that a letter was given to Tow Peeah to take to the French. I heard the Cambodian interpreter telling the messenger to tell the French to bring soldiers quickly from Kammoun to rein- force Kieng Chek. In what language did this take place? The Cambodian interpreter spoke to the messenger in Lios. Whenever I went down to the landing to bathe four soldiers with loaded rifles always accompanied me, some before and some behind. After two or three days Plna Tot arrived. On the morning of that day Tow Peeah whisper ed to me in my riiom that some of the French were already arrived with Lak Mouang and were calculating to reach our house that particular afternoon. On that day I saw the farnng give to one of the inhabitants a letter to take to the French and to give it to the French wherever he might happen to meet them. On that day, about 1 or 2 o'clock, I can't say exactly what hour, I heard the noise as of a crowd, and in our own house I heard the sound of soldiers running to and fro and fallinjj^ into line near the ladder and talking excitedly to each other. I could not understand the lan- guage. As the soldiers ran out of the several parts of the house and out of our room, I ran out of the room, too, to the . outtide part. The farang came out and stood there, too. At that moment I saw the Cnmbodian interpreter standing at the foot of the ladder, on the ground, and Khoon Wang coming up and speaking thero to the Camlndiau intcrpretir, asking for me to be given up, imd the Cambo- dian interpreter siioke in a fuiM;;u lang- uage to t\\e juramj. Thu /(ta»(/'.'i answer was that he Imd no power or autlinnty to give me up. Khoon Wang repeated tho I eqnest several times without effect, and then asked for the giving up of the guns, etc., and this being I'efused he deuiauded thnt tho Frencli sliould go out of the territory. And the French refused all these requests. Phra Yot then . ciflled me to come down to him "como heije, come here." Then Boon Chan turned and spoke to the farang, and the farang at once put out his hand and seized me by the wrist ; and the farang called out " Ongkay Ongkay" and an Annamite soldier (he had gold bands on his sleeve) immediately came running up the steps; and while they spoke together, and while the farang still held my hand, Boon Chan came running up the steps to us. Then Ong Kay ran up to the furthest corner of the house and took his gnn and ran into the room with it, and the farang drau'ged me towards the nearest door, to get me into the room. Boon Chan got into the room before the farang did, and the farang (still holding my band) went through the door into the room, and I at that moment succeeded in dragging my hand away, and jumped off the house and got away. At the moment when the farang just got inside the door and was trying to drag me in too, I distinctly saw Ong Kay (the Annamite soldier) in the act of loading his gun, in the room there. The same moment that I reached tlio ground I heard the sound of a «un going off. The sound came distinctly from the house. At that second I saw one of our Korat soldiers (in front of me as I then was) fall to the ground, dead, Then I heard several gun-shots from behind me; I cannot say exactly how many shots. Phra Yot and Nai To'ii and Nai Plaak were for- bidding our soldiers from shooting, and saying ""Wait to speak together first." I could not hear exactly whose voice it was, the noise and excitement were so great — but I heard the forbidding dis- tinctly. The firing rapidly increased and — 26. became general, and I had, by this time, rasbed up and joined Phra Yot's party. Bat, rasMng up as I did, I cannot be sure about who fired or who didn't. After the fight w&s over I found that Khoon Wang had died, and that 4 or 5 of my men aud several others of our men were hurt while the fight was going on ; fire had broken oat in the house, at the back. As the fire got very hot Boou Chau came running out of the house, up to me, begging me to spare his life. So I led him to Phra Yot who entrusted him to some one — I don't know whom — to be taken down by boat, while Phra Tot and myself and our people went down in other boats. The Chief Justice : During or after the fight did you see auy Siamese go and take things from the house ? No I saw no one The fire was too hot already, when the Cambodian interpreter came out, for auy one to go into the house. After the fight did no one of the Siamese go up on that day to see how many had died? No; on that ilaj- I siiw no one go • and look. ' , The Chief Justice : When you went down to your boats was the fire still burning? Yes ; still burning. Mr. Page : Would your Lordship, on another day, allow me to ask the witnesses qaestious, before your Lordship, and then your Lordship can ask yours after that ? But it docs not matter to-day, as we shall have this evening to look over what has passed in Court to-day, before I prepare the questions I have to put to this witness. On auother day it might happen that your Lordship would your- self, ask some other witnesses all the questions which I had prepared for a particular witness, and I should not have time to reprepare my questions for that wtness. The Chief Justice : We shall only examine in this way Nai Plaak and Nai Tool, as they only were personally concerned in the affair by name and conspicuous position ; in fact we shall not require to examine any other witnesses besides these two. But, of coarse the counsel for the defence may do what they please in the matter. The Court then adiourned till Tues- day morning. EIGHTH DAY, TUESDAY, 6th Maboh, 1894. Yesterday, on the Court resuming, at 10.40 A. u., Luang Amirak was further examined by Mr. Page. As far as you know was Phra Yot hated by the people ? No, I never heard of him being hated by the people, but I know they came around crying when he was driven away. When you were in the granary had you then or afterwards made any promise to the French that vou would not run away or attack them,, in fact were you on parole? No, there was no- agreement or promise of that kind. Did you or Phra Yot ever ask for any French soldiers to protect you during your journey to Kieng Chek ? No ; we never spoke on this matter at all. Yesterday you were asked : "Why did you not make preparations to receive the French, and you answered : " No orders were received." What did you mean by that ? I meant that I received no order from Phra Yot to make anj- preparation, but Phra Yot and I had pre- viously consulted together, and we agi-eed that our force was not sufficient to offer resistance. What did you consult about ? "V^e consulted together and decided that our force was not si&cient — was too small — for resistance. When you were being guarded, in the house,, was M. Grosgurin very sick "? 1 cannot say how sick he was, but I saw him walking in and out and giving orders to the soldiers throughout that time. Mr. Page said these were all the questions he required to put to the u-itness. Cross-examined by Nai Hasbamror. witness deposed as follows : — Were you with Phra Yot officially when he was originally at Nakon Sawan ? Yes. When Phra Yot was Commissioner at Kam- I moun, did he generally consult with you on I official matters ? Yes. i Who took Phra Yot's letters to Outheue'r I I cannot remember, it is too long ago. Sometimes I inhabitants, sometimes Laos officials, sometimes i soldiers. I cannot say for certain on any par- ticular occasion. , The last letter which Phra Yot wrote about being driven out of the stockade or being kept ' in the granary — who took that letter? I ean- ' not remember. * Do you remember its date r No ; I do not. ' You said that the French prevented you at ; that time, from getting food or anything at all, ■ how then could a letter be sent by Phra Yot ? ' I don't know how it got sent, it may have been ' at night. I don't even know whether or not i the French were aware of its being sent. You were the bearer of the letter from Phra I Tot to M. Luce, about handing over the dis- I trict, were you not ':" Yes. Do you know all that was in that letter ? It i is so long ago that I cannot remember; but I I can remember distinctly that Phra Yot did not give up Eammoun "and Kam Kurt to the- j French, and, later, at the end. it said that if any orders came from the Siamese G-ovem- meut we. shoidd make arrangements ac- cordingly. Did Phra Yot, in writmg that letter, mean to bind himself not to attack the French? I do not know I only know that arrangements would be made when orders came. You said just now that you and Phra Yot, in consultation, decided on handing over the- district? I did not say that. We decided on handing over the district under protest,, until further orders should be received. When you left Kammoun did the mhabi- tants come and see you off ? Yes, there were some, at the door and at the start, crving and weeping. — 27 — Many? Yes. You said just now that the inhabitants cried ■when you were driven out. Tou said all ; do you mean officials and all — every one? I think I said nearly every one. The Chief Justice: — Tes; that was what he said. Phra Yot said that he gave over the district under protest ; in the meantime he would make arrangements after he had received further orders. Did you understand that Phra Tot would do whatever he was ordered to do, when the order came V Yes. "When the French were holding you under guard, were there always foui- soldiers guard- ing you? Tes. How many days were yovi there? Three or four days ; I don't remember exactly. soldiers from the house ? I cannot remember the number of " wahs." Could you recognise their faces from the house? Tes; but I could not hear exactly what they said; I could only hear the sound of their voices. The Chief Justice: — Speak out what you know. Do not be afraid. Further croas-exammed : — Was it quite evening when Phra Tot left the fighting place? What sort of time was it by the clock?' I really don't know what time it was by the clock. Was it nearly sunset? The sun had not yet well set. We reached Wieng Erasene that night. When you jumjjed off the house you heard a gun go off behind you 7 I heard it from in- During those three or four days that you ! side the house, behind me. were under guard thus, were there always sol- 1 At that moment you jumped off, where was diers with you ; at all times of your going and I Boon Chan r Boon Chan had just rushed coming ? Tes ; at all times. i into the room, Wheu you slept ? Tes. ' After you reached the seen. The fighting was nearly over. Just before that time where were the Sia- mese soldiers ? They were shooting, standing together shooting as before. At that time you were standing close to Phra Tot wer'nt you ? I was close to him, how far I can't exactly say. How many were lying dead ? I did not go up to count, I think there were 5 or 6, I went down to the boat. 28 Nai Tool was then called by the defence, and deposed as follows: — I am of the rank of Nai Boi Kree, of the Palace Guard. I went "in the year 110 with £rommun Prachak up to the Loaa country. Luang Vichit sent me from Nong !Khai to Outhene, in Prispakhom(May)112. I don't know from what cause. After the fire had reached over nearly half the house the Cambodian rushed out of the house and jumped off, and went up to Luang Anurak, and asked Luanjr Anurak to succour him. Luang Anurak took him by the hand and led him to Phra Yot. By this time the shooting . The Chief Justice: How did you come to | had ceased, and the house was still increasingly be in charge of the soldiers who went to join in flames ; and then, Phra Yot went to find Phia Tot ? During May(112) Luang Vichit | Koon Wang at the stairs, and found Koon had heard that Phra Tot and his party were in the hands of the French and so he ordered me to go up and ask for Phra Tot and all his ofS- cials in the hands of the French, and to drive the French out of the territory. He sent about 50 soldiers with me. We met Phra Tot at Wieng Erasene, after going by boat for about two nights. Phra Tot goes already on shore with the party at the stockade at Wieng Krasene and I went with Nai Plaak to see Phra Tot, and Wang's body. The Chief Justice : Did you see anybody go up into the house at this time ? No ; I saw none; indeed the heat .of the flames was too great to admit of anyone going up there. Examination continued : Phra Tot brought Koon Wang's body and the guns and bayonets and arms of the Annamite soldiers who died on the ground— four or five guns. We all of u<, then, went down to the boats, including he told us all that had happened, how the the Cambodian interprete:- and Luang Anurak, French had taken him and his party to Kieng | and we went down to Wipng Krasene. Chek and how they had arrested Luang- ! The Chief Justice: When were the other Anurak and I then told him the orders i two Annamite soldier.s caught ? After a day or which I had received from Luang Vichit, that two, we were to drive tho Fi-ench out and ask for i Who caught them ? I believe the Laos offici- the person of Luaui? Anurak. Then we went als did so, for Phra Tot rent some up to iind on to the old Best-house at Eieng Chek. I out about the dead etc. I bulio've it was they There we asked Phra Tot who would be tldk who brought them down. best man to send forward to ask for Luang ; Mr. Page examined witness as follows : — Anurak's body from the French. Phra Tot ] When you and Nai Plaak left, did Luang said that £hoon Wang had already been sent I Vichit give you writt<»n or verijal orders ? I on this errand, so he was the one decided on ' had verbal orders. to (,'0 and we went on afterwards with our sulci iers. At last we reached the house, and Eoon Wang spoke to the farang, but I did not hear what actually passed. There was the Cambo- dian interpreter at the foot of the stairs, talk- ing to Koon Wang, andthe/aran^ was standing on the verandah at the head of the stairs. Luang Anurak was on that verandah too. Koon Wang shouted out "They refuse to give Luang Anurak up and they refuse to leave the territory. " At that moment the Annamite soldiers were standing at the stairs by the side of the house, in the rank — about six or seven there were some alsoin the house — I can not say how many. Then Phra Tot called out to Luang Anurak "Come here" Luang Anurak was evidently going to come when the farang seized him by the hand, to drag him into the hou3e itself, Bat Luang Anurak jerked him- self loose, and jumped ofi the house and came to Phra Tot. A gun went ofE from in- side the house, after Luang Anurak, as he was comiug from the house ; but the bullet missed Luang Anurak and hit one of I Did you receive any later orders in ad- dition ? Tea ; I did. After I had left Outhene. How did you get those orders ? The Laos official at Outhene came after me quickly, in a boat, with those orders. Were those orders given you by the Laos official in writing or how were they given ? They were writtem orders. Can you show us those orders? Yes, (orders produced). Will you read them, please ? The Eecorder then read the orders (which were translated in Court as under) : — "Let Nai Tool go quickly forwards; and wherever you meet the Annamite soldiers insist on their going back. If they refuse to go back, fight them. Make proper arrange- ments at Kieng Chek, and insist on Phra Yot being freed." You said in your evidence that you saw the /aronj standing in the verandah; how could you be quite sure it was the farang, when you first came insight of the house ? Yes, I am quite sure; I am a Bangkok person; I can recoonise. You said in your evidence that after several my Korat soldiers and killed him. Then | shots had been" fired you and Nai Plaak gave two or three more shots went off in the house, and two more of our soldier (Korat men) fell. Phra Yot and I then shouted out, forbidding any shooting, and we talked together. The French would not obey. Then seeing that there was more shooting from inside the house, and from underneath it, and two or three more of our men fell dead. We consvdted with Phra Yot, saying that we surely ought to return' the fire, since our men were being killed, and Phra Yot agreed that we ought. I and' Nai' Plaak then ordered our soldiers to fire in' return, and the firing became general About this time, while the shooting 'was going on onbothsidesthehousecaughtfireatthe back. orders to shoot; did you hear Phra Yot give any orders to that effect ?I could not see whether he gave the orders or not. Directly I and Nai Plaak gave orders to shoot the shooting commenced and I could not hear what Phra Yot ordered. Did you see the farang shoot at all? Yes I saw him shooting from the -window, at the same time as the interpreter. Do you mean that the Cambodian interpre- ter was also shooting ? Yes, he -was ■with the farang. I was not quite sure. Did Phra Yot or his party after the fighting collect anything besides weapons ? I did not see anything takra beside. — 29 If the French had given up Luang Anurak what would your |pa^ have done then ? If they had given him up our determination was not to do any harm, but to insist on their evacuation of the territory. Why, then, did you shoot, that day '? What else could we do ; the other side had fired and lolled many of our men ; what else could we do but fire in return ? (laughter). Did Luang Vichit give you any orders as to what you were to do if Phra Tot had escaped from the French hands ? He ordered me that if Phra Tot had escaped, I and Nai Plaak and Phra Tot should consult together as to what steps to take to insist on the French evacuating the territory. Mr. Page said that was all he wished to ask the witness. The Chief Justice : Whose order did you take this to be ? I took it to be Luang Vichit's because the Tow Peeah told be given ? We all were of the same opinion. . After the first three or four shots had been fired Phra Tot had forbidden the French to shoot and they would not stop, and 2 or 3 more of your men had died was that the time you ordered your men to shoot or after ? I can't understand the question. How many of your men had died before you gave the order to shoot ? Three or four, I could not say exactly how many, Tou said be- fore in your evidence that 5 or 6 had died why do you now say 3 or 4 ? The Chief Justice. Before this is answered I must have the actual words read which he said in his statement to me. He said, you see, that the other 2 or 3 had fallen down, not that they had died. Luang Sunthorn. I understood the evidence given. Why did you not wait one or two days at Wieng Ej^sene before you went to ask for Luang Amirak's person ? It was important me that Luang I ^ ^^ Vichit had ordered him to take this particular j and urgent business, letter to me at once. Did you take with you all the soldiers How comes it to be written on the same i which were under your command ? I did not paper as a letter from Phra Tot? I believe Phra 'take the sick ones. Before you left did you Tot had written the letter to Luang Vichit j make your soldiers " fall in " (go into rank), and Luang Vichit, he got it and wrote on and count them ? I did not fall them in for it his own orders to me in a hurry, and sent I Jmew how many I started with and how the Tow Peeah with it to me. Cross-examined by the Advocate for the Crown (Luang Sunthoi-n) : — Before you left Outhene did Luang Vichit give you any orders ? Tes ; he told me, as I said before, to ask for Phra Tot and his party, and his possessions. Anything else ? Tes: to insist on the eva- -cuation of the territory by the French. Did he, at that time, give you no order to fight the French? No; he gave no such order. He told us if the party were given up to us, to insist that the French should leave the terri- tory. Do you know whether Phra Tot's letter to Nai Eoi To had reached Outhene before you left? I don't know. Tou said, just now. that you received addi- tional orders after you left. From whom did you get those orders? From Luang Vichit. Was the letter signed? No. How, then, did you know it was from Luang Vichit? Because the Tow Peeah who brought it said that Luang Vichit told him to bring this particular letter. Was it an ordinary event for you to get, and act on, unsigned orders which would de- pend, practically, on the word of the bearer? Letters on matters of urgency and haste. Do Siamese military laws say that if the order you receive has no signature you should believe the bearer? I am an acting Nai Boi Eri, I don't know what the army law is on the point. When you reached Phra Tot at Wieng Erasene did you show him that written order of Luang Vichit or not ? No, I only told bim by word of mouth. Were you over Phra Tot or Phra Tot over you on that expedition ? We were equal. If he ordered you to do anything would you many I had left sick. Can you now recollect how many were not sick ? Forty-seven. Did Phra Tot take any of his own soldiers with him from Wieng Krasene to Kieng Chek? Tes, some of his men. But they were not soldiers, they were men, they had no uniform on or guns or weapons, they only had a few knives. About how many of these " men " were there ? About 14 or 15. Where did you see the fire break out, at the top or the bottom first ? At the back. Would it have been possible for anyone to have put fire to it from down below ? ' No, it would have been impossible. I Where were you then standing ? In front of the ladder with Phra Tot. Show on the plan. Witness pointed out the saiue spot as had before been named in Court by Phra, Tot, and showed also the spot where the fire first broke out. The latter was also the same spot as that named by Phra Tot. If you were in front of the house how was it possible to tell whether or not any one put fire to the house at the back, too high for a man to reach up to light it? I came to that conclu- sion because the roof was so high. How many minutes elapsed between Luang Anurak jumping down and the stopping of the shooting ? I should think from 15 to 20 minutes. How many minutes between Luang Anurak jumping down and your seeing the fire first breaking out ? Ten or 15 minutes ; I oannot say at aU exactly. Can you explain to the Court why so few Siamese died, but so many French, even though the French (as you say), fired several shots before the Siamese began shooting? do it or not ? If it was a right thing to do i The farangs were few, and our party was I should do it, if not, not. j numerous. Before you gave the order to shoot did you I Did you hear the order given l)y Phra Tot first consult with Phra Tot ? Tes. ' to collect the guns of the Annamite ssldiers ? Did Phra Tot agree that the order should | Tes ? I did. — 30 — Did you hear the order given to collect but at the moment he jumped ofE a gun went anything beside guns ? Ko. off. Mr. Page ; That question was asked before From where was that gun shot ? From in those words, and answered by this witness, inside the house. The Chief Justice:* If they are uncertain Did that shot kill any one ? A soldier from about this or any other point let them ask it Korat, in our ranks, died, again. " Did our soldiers at once Ijegin to fire then ? He Advocate for the Crown : Did Phi-a i Not yet. Tot tell you at Wieng Krasene that he had ' Did anyone forbid them to fire r Yes ; Nai written a" letter giving up Kammoun to the | Tooi, myself and Phra Vot forbid them to fire, French imder jirotest ? No, he did not tell me. | saying we should speak tojjether first. Then This concluded the witness's evidence, and ; followed several more shots. On the Court rising to adjourn for the day, ' Are you sure from which side those several Mr. Page said he had one more letter which ' more shots were fired? 'From on the liouse, he wished to put in. The previous day he had ; some, from on the groimd .some, promised to hand in, that day. any other letters Were any moro of your men killed bv those which he wanted in evidence. He therefore, i several more shots ? Yes, two or three. now handed in a letter. The Court then adjourned till 10 o'clock this morning. NINTH DAY, WEDNESDAY. 7th Maech, 1894. Did you then consult .imougst yourselves what you shoidd do ? We considted together seeing that the French refused to listen to our orders not to shoot. We consulted and said tliat as they refused we must return fire, and < irders were given to shoot, so our men Ix'gan shoot- ing. Did you see anv one set fire to the house ? fire first break out ; At the back of the could house- The Spec.ial Court for Trial of the those ■ concerned in the Kieug Cliek Affair reassem- i No. bled at 11 a.m., at the Royal Courts of Justice' i Where did the yesterday, directly after M. Ducos and M. ! you tell at all ■■" Hardouiii. the French Consul, arrived, • | first. On Comiiieneing the Proceedings. I Did you see any of our soldier go round to The Recorder read a letter from Phra Yot | the back of the house, where they could have Luang Vichit to. i set fire to it. No ; I saw none. The Advocate for the Crown (Luang \ Did your men collect anything besides the Sunthorn) asked that the letter from Phra ' arms, ammunition, and weapons, after the Yot to Nai Um should be read. ! battle ? Phra Tot gave the order to collect Mr. Page said he had not intended to read j the weapons only, nothing else, the letter, but as it was before the Court it | Li any of the boats on the way down to was a matter of indifference to him whether it j Wieng Krasene did you see anything, besides was read or not. : arms and ammunition, whidi belonged to the The Chief Justice ruled that the letter I French ? I saw nothinj;. should be read and this v.'as done bv the ' Recorder. Nai Plaak, called by the defence, and ex- amined by Mr. Page, dejxjsed as follows : — Is your name Nai Plaak 'f Yes. What is your rank ? I am acting Nai Roi Kree, When Nai Tooi left Outhene to go to Kieng Chek; did you accompany him ? Yes I did. Did you and he have separate orders from Luang Vichit ? They were the same orders. What were the orders ? That the French I)eople had tvimed Phra Yot out of Eammoun, and our orders were to demand the release of Phra Yot, and to insist on the French leaving that territory. When you reached the house at Eieng Chek was the farang standing outside ? He was standing on the house, at the ladder. Who else did you see standing about, in the house or near it? The farang was stand- mg at the top of the stairs, near the partition of the room, and Luang Anurak was standing near him, at the top of the same stairs. Who was standing on the ground facing the farang ? I saw the Cambodian interpreter standing on the groimd facing the farang, and also Kom Wang standing near, facing the interpreter. Did you see the farang catch hold of Luang Anurak, and Luang Anurak try to get away ? Tes;Idid. Had any guns gone off before Luang Anurak pum^d off the house!' Before he jumped off the house no guns had gone off. Did you see any illtreatment of the Cambo- dian interpreter, by your party ? No. I saw none. Mr. Page. — I think , now, my Lord, we have got aU the important points of the witness's evidence and we will not waste the time of the Court by examining him further. Witneess was then cross-examined bv the Advocate for the Crown as under : — How many soldiers did Nai Tooi and you take with you ? About 46 or 47. What did you take soldiers for ? For our- protection. Was your intention to get Luang Anurak .' Yes. When Luang Anurak came off the house,, and thus you had him safe, and the French had not yet shot, why did you not then retiuii ? The French had been abeady shoot- mg and killing our men; they wo'uld not cease when we asked them to. Our men were- being killed ; what could we do but fire in return. If you had retired at that moment would there have l^^en any ISUldjJJD ? Yes some of our soldiers had' abeady died. You said you saw none of your soldiers go !? ^1* ^e to the house. Was it possible that they did so without your seeing it ? It raiffht have been so. On the way back from Kieng Chek to Wieng- — 31 — Eresene about how many boats were there in your party ? I think about 20 counting small boats as well as big. You said in your evidence that you saw nothing belonging to the French except weapons Ac , in the boats on the way down ? You meant only your own boat I suppose ? No I saw nothing except weapons Ac, anywhere, at any time, belonging to the French, in the hands of the Siamese. Do you mean you mode a careful examina- tion, throughout ever)- boat so as to see ? No, but we were all close together on the journey, and I saw nothing. Could any of your i>arty have kejit anything concealed which you did not see V I do not think so because it w.is impossible for them to have got anything out of the house, the fire was so hot. My question was. would it have been impos- ble to conceal things ' Yes, it might have been. When you left was the house burned right out ? No, not yet. Would it have been possible for any one to have gone "and taken things from the house after you had gone into your boat ? No, for we collected all our men together, down into the boats. I went after them. Between the end of the shooting and your going into the boats did you see none of the Siamese enter the house '! No, none. Would it have been possible for any one . to go uj) without your seeing themi' No it would have been impossible. ; The Chief Justice. Did yoti examine and count the Siamese dead and woiuided ? Ves ; there were six dead, and four or five wounded. Wei-e all the dead and wounded men, soldiers? Or were Phra Yot'» men all soldiers? '. Yes. How many Auuamites died? About four or five. After the fight at Kieug Chek, did you go and collect or examine the Annamite dead and wounded'.' Phra Yot sent up men. No. I mean on that occasion ? On that occasion we did not. Wlieu did Phra Yot send to have the inspec- tion made ? On a different day. Eoou Narong, examined by Mr. Page, de- posed : — Were you with Phra Yot at Kammouu when the French came ? Yes. How long have you been with Phra Yot on public Inisiness ? Since Pee Choi (8 years ago. ) Have you ever heard that Phra Yot was hated by the people of Kammoun ? No ; they did no hate him. ' Were you at Kammoun with Phra Yot when the French came there ? Yes ; I was. Did you see Phra Yot driven out of the . stockade by the French ? Yes ; I did. How did they drive Phra Yot out of that ' stockade? They caught him by the hands and dragged him forward, and there were ' soldiers behind with bayonets at his shoiilders driving him forth, at the back. | Did the French seize all the weapons of ' your party Yes all. j Was Koou Wang with youi- pcirty .it Kam- ' monn V No ; he was not ? , Where did Koon Wang meet Phra Yot? At Na Lah Hin. Did Khoon Wang come to live with Phra Yot? No. At the time you were there did the French come to see you and Phra Yot 'r Yes. Did the Cambodian iuterjjreter say anything- to Phra Yot, when he came to Lah Hin? Yes ; he did. What did he say ? He said that they were* to start off first and that Phra Yot was to fol- low after. Did he say at what place the French were going to stay at Kieng Chek ? He did. What place did he name ? At the Eest- house. When arrived at Kieug Chek where did your party stay? It was at the site of a rest- house, but at the time there was no house, and no building there. When the/arn.»;/ i-ame and arrested Luang Anurak wert; you there? Yes, I was. Will you tell us how he aiTested him? They knocked him so that he was flat on the ground and they held him by the neck and on the side and they had a soldier's cloth to fasten his legs with, and thus dragged him down. Were you present at the fight at Kieug Chek? Yes, I was. At the moment you came in sight of the house did you see the /uraMi/, and where was he standing? Yes I saw him. He was nrmid- ing at the door by the stairs. Did you see at that time Luang Anurai: ':' Yes I did. Where was Luang Anuvak standing ? Close by the fhefarang. Did you yourself see the farang catch Luang Anurak, and Luang Anurak escape from him ? Yes, I did. What happened when Luang Anurak jumped down ? At what moment a gun went off Iroiii the house. Did that shct kill anyone? A Eorat soldier died. After that was there more shooting? I heard two or three shots. In what direction did these two or three shots come ? Some came from on the house, iiiid ti.e sound of some came from below the house : Did none of tht^se shuts coiiie from our siile ? iNo, uot from our side. Did our men afterwards begin to short ? Yes they did. Did you see anyone .set fire to that house ? I did not see any one. Do you at aU know Iiow that house i.aujilit fire? No ; but it caught fire at the bai-k oi the house. Mr. Page : I did not ask where it caught fire, but how? I don't know. Did you yourself take ajiy of the French possession's before you went into the boat ? No ; I did not. In the boats on the way down to Krasene did you see any French property, besides weapons ? No ; I did not. Did you see the Jarang shooting at all ? Yes ; I did. From what place ? From in the house. On the jiiurney down to Wieng Krasene did 32 — you see the Cambodian interpreter illtreated ? No ; I did not. Mr. Page : That it a^ I require to ask this witness, your Lordsliip. Csoss-EZAMiNKD by the Adrocate for the Crown! When you and Phra Yot were at Lak Hin did the Cambodian interpreter tell Phra Yot *whe^ he was to go and sta^ ? No ; he did not. !Wlien the Cambodian mterpreter came to talk to Phra Yot were you far away? Not two far to hear. You said in your evidence that the French people would stay at the Best-house, was it the old or the new one ." The new one. Yon said Ehoon Wang joined Phra Yot at Lak Hin? Where bad he come from; Prom Outhene ? Did any one come with Khoon Wang? I don't know. When you left Lak Hin do you know how many men Ehoon Wang brought with him? No, I don't know. Did Ehoon Wang bring any arms? I did not see whether he did or not. How many shots had been fired by the French before you began to shoot? About three shots. • Had any one died? A Korat soldier had died, whether any others had or not I could not notice. Where were the Annamite soldiers standing then ? Off from the ladder by the side of the house in line. About how many ? In the ranks about 9 or 10 but there were others on the house and un- der and round it. Are you sure those on the house were sol- diei-s ? Some certainly were : some may have Vieen servants but all had guns. You said in your evidence that the farang was shooting. Had the Siamese already began to shoot then .5 Then/«rrt»ij shot and the Siamese shot in return. When you returned to Wieng Krasene were any of your party left at Kieng Chek? No, none. Did you see with your own eyes how many Annamite soldiers died? I don't know how many died in all but I myself saw 3 or 4 dead near the ladder. Did you see any one take any of Boon Chan's things away from him when he was being taken down to the boat ? No I did not see any one do so. Nai Yam examined by Mr. Page: — How long have you lieen in the Q-ovemment service, with Phra Yot? At Eammoun 9 years. Did any of the native officials or the inhabi- tants ever teU you they hated Phra, YotP I heard nothing of the kmd. Did you see the French party take away any weapons when they drove Phra Yot from the stockade? They collected our weapons and other things and put them inside the stockade Did you see the farang come and arrest Luang Anurak at Kieng Chek ? Yes; I did Was Luang Anurak ill-treated at all whUe he was under arrest ? I saw the soldiers push him so that he fell on the ground, and take a soldier's cloth and tie his hands and drag him away. Do you recollect Nai Plaak and Nai Tool meetingPhra Yot at Wieng Krasene? tea; I do. . „ Had they soldiers with them; how many r" When we first met them they had two or three. Had they any more under their charge? _ I saw these two or three were actually with them, whether they had any more under their charge I could not tell ; I do not know. Do you mean that you never saw any more soldiers at aU, at Wieng Erasene, at any time? Yes, some came but they did not come with Nai Tooi. Do you know how many soldiers Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi had under their charge alto- gether ? Something like nine or 20, I do not know exactly (laughter). Were you present at the fight at Kieng Chek? Yes; I was. Did you see any Siamese soldiers killed at Kieng Chek ? Yes. Did you see Luang Anui-ak jump ofi the house, and go to Phra Yot's party f Yes Did you hear anybody shoot when Luang Anurak jumT)ed down ? Now don't be afraid. Yes ; when he jumped down I heard a gun go ofE from the house. When Luanfj Anurak jumped down you say a gun went of ; did you see that shot kill any- one ? Yes ; it hit a Korat soldier, who fell. Did any more guns go ofi after that ? I heard several guns, after that, going off ; I do not know whose they were. Did you see anyone go and set fire to the house? I saw no one do so.' Did you yourself ; go up into the house ? No ; I did not. Did you see anyone else go up ? No ; I did not. Did yon, yourself, get any property out of that house ? No ; I got nothing. Cross-examined by Nai Hasbamror : — How many men were there, altogetlier, going up to Kieng Chek ? .\boat 40 or 50. How many were I'hra Yot's men ? I aon't remember. How many were Nai Plaak and Nai Tool's men ? I cannot remember. Did any soldiers go? Were there 40 or or 50 ? Yes. Were they all soldiers ? Some were sol- diers ; some were Laos. Did all carry guns ? No, not all. Did all Phra Yot's men carry guns ? No, not all. How many of them did ? Two. What were the others carrying.' Many had nothing ; some had knives. When you first arrived did you see any one go up into the house ? No. Did you see Koon Wang go up ? No. Now, from the start to your return did you see Koon Ohamnong go up into the house or not ? No, I did not, Did Koon Cbamnong go with you ? Yes, he was on the ground. How far were you and Koon Chamnong from each other ? Two wahs. If Koon Chamnong had gone up would you have seen it ? 1 did not see him go up, We were standing together. Where did you see the fire start ? At the back. 33—* .^''ere about from behind? At the back. ^Witness pointed out the place on the model). Were any Siamese soldiers round there near that baokpart of the house ? No, only on these two near sides. Where were the Annamite soldiers ? (Wit- ness indicated the positions on the model). Did you see Luang Anurak before he jumped off? (Witness showed, on the model'. Did you see Luang Anurak jump off the house ? Yea, I did. Did you see the farang anywhere in the house 'f Yes, I saw him on the house. Did you see the fire break oat ? Yes I did. After the fire did you see the Cambodian interpreter come out of the house ■■> Yes. I did. When the Cambodiam interpreter came where he saw Luang Anurak, which was on ■ out were the flames verj- furious .=" Yes. tne verandah, near the head of the stairs.) , Did vou see Koon Wang go up to the house • jy°J? ^^^ Luang Anurak before he ; aud speak to anyone ? Yes, I saw him go up jumped off ? ( Witness showed the place on ' and ask for Luaig Anurak. the model viz: on the verandah near the > Did vou hear a reply given to that request ? nead ot the stairs.) | What the answer was I don't know, but Koon \\ Jio was there on the ground y Khoon.: Wang replied that they had refused him. »t ang and the Cambodian Interpreter. Did anyone call out to Luang Anurak theu? You said a gun was fired from the house , I cauuot say I heard anj-one at all. but I heard when Luang ."inurak jumped off, who tired noises, and "then I saw' Luang Anurak see who it was : I soldier fall dead the Siamese heard none Did jump down. At the moment Luang Anurak jumped down did you hear a guu fired from the house ! I Yes ; I heard the sound of a gun from the house. Did that shot kill anyone ; A Korat soljiir was hit and died. After that did the French shoot any niorf shots \ Yes ; after that there was the sound of «wo or three more shots, Wlien these shots were fired did you si^f imv more of our men fall y I did not notice. When did our men fire, Xitvx or !)et'on' the French fired y After. How many men had Nai Tooi and Nai Pliuik there y I should think about 30 or 40, but whether more or less I cannot exactly say. Did you yourself go up to the house at Kieng Chek ? No ; I never did. Cross-examined by the Aduicate for the Crown : — How many shots had the French shot before your men shot? Four or five, or possibly more. Was it the people on the house, or on the ground ? The people in the house began the shooting. Did the people on -the ground not fire at all before your party Iiegan ? After four or five shots from the house the people on the ground began to shoot. Before that time had the Siamese not shot at all ? No ; not at all Wliat weapons were you caiTving? I was carrying a gtm. When you saw the flames begin had the shooting already stopped? No; the shooting, was going on. , . , , , . J , Did the Cambodian interpreter come down morphia and might be rather stupid. | g^gj. ^,. ^jj j^^ shooting stop first ? The shooting stopped, and then Boon Chan came down. Where were you then ? By the small rice- house. Did you go up into the house ? No. Did you see any one go up ? No ; I saw no one go up. Would it have been possible for any one to go ujj ? I think not the fire was already very hot. Between the stopping of all shooting and the time when the Cambodian interpreter came anj' of our soldiers killed ? out could any one have gone up into the house? that gun ? I could not heard the sound and saw a near the tree. Did you hear anyone order soldiers at that moment ? No. I then. Did anyone forbid ? I heard guns going off and then I heard master say " Don't, don't! speak first." Who do you mean by muster I I'hra Yot. What did l^hra Yot do then ? I did not hear him say anything. Did no one give any order to shoot in return ? I heard none,. Who then shot ? There was shooting on all sides. You don't know e.\actly who .' There was shooting on all sides. IJow many Siamese soldiers died .' Six. How many Annauiitos.' I don't know,; I saw some lying dead. i Did no one go close up to lihe house .' 1 1 saw no one. On the way down what boat did you come in ? In Phra Yot's boat. 1 Did you see any one take things or boxes i from the house .' No, I saw no one do so. i On the way down did j'ou see any guns?' Yes, I saw now and then a man who said ! he had found a gun, and they were given to | Phra Yot. ; When you left Wieng Krasene what were you going up to Kieng Chek for .' I believe it was to ask for Luang Anurak. ' If they refused to give him up, what then i I don't know at all. Mr. Page said the next witness was still . sick, but he would call him. The man wasi takinj^ Mr. Page: We intend to call this next wit- ness, but, when his evidence is finished, I ! should like your Lordship's opinion as to: whether you would like us to call any more witnesses. \ The Chief Justice: I -ivill leave that at! youi' discretion. Num Chamnong was then called and e.\- . auiined by Mr. Page as follows. : — , Were you present at the fight at Kieng Chek ? Yes. you Yes, I saw some. ■ TiSo; I think not. — 34 — Whv not? Because the fire was already so Hot. Bid you meet'Boou Chau that day? I met him at Wieug Eraseue. Did you uot meet him at Eieng Chek ? No. Did you show two IxTttles to Boon Chan! No. , When you said you met Boon Chan at Wieng Krasene did you speak to him? He asked me for some hot water there. The Chief justice: "What did you give him to drink there? I gave him hot water. Where did you get it from ? I boiled the water and gave it to him. Was it hot water or had it tea in it? Nothing, Was ic in a cup? Yes in a cup. W9.S Boon Chfui in a boat or on laud when you gave him that hot water ? In a boat. When did you boil the water? On land. Did Boon Chan jump oS the house of his own accord or did some of our people help him out or force him out ? No, he came out alone. Had Boon Chan any things with him when he came down? I saw none. Did he ask any one for medicine for wounds ? I did not hear. Did any one put medicine on his wounds ? I did uot see any one. Mr. Page. What did you mean by saying you did not meet Boon Chan at Eieng Chek? Did you not see him at all ? I saw him there but I did not notice what boat he went into. The Court explained that the word "meet" meant more "coming close up " or " speaking to" not simply ^'seeing." Tou said in your evidence that you did not meet Boon Chan that day. I suppose you mean you did not speak to him? I saw him when he came down from the house. The Chief Justice asked whether the Coun- sel for the defence had any further documents to put in as evidence. Mr. Fa^ said he did sot require to put in as evidence the document produced the previ- ous day, namely, the written order of . Luang Vichit to Nai Tooi. The Advocate for the Crown said he wished the letter of Phra Tot to Nai Eoi To Nai TJm to be produced as evidence. ' The Court said that , of course, might be taken down as evidence called for by the prose- cution. The document in question was one produced by Nai Tooi in his evidence as being his orders, and were written hurriedly by Luang Yichit himself, at the end of a letter .which he had just received from Phra Tot. These orders were : — Let Nai Tooi hurry forward as quickly as possible. Wherever you meet the Amiamite soldiers expel them; if they refuse to retire fight them at once, and then hnny f oi-ward and make a strong position at Kieng Chek. Be sure to secure the person of Phra Tot, so that yon may have the assistance of his forces in addition. Phra Tot's letter was as follows : — " 1, Phra Tot MuaugQuang, Deputy Commis- sioner of Muang Eam Eurt and Muang Eam- moun, send this letter to Nai Boi To Nai Um, Commissioner at Tar Outhene, and inform him that the French with 20 soldiers are coming to take me down to Tar Outhene and we have reached Ban Pha Muang. Let Commissioner Nai Boi To Nai TJm prepare arms and send them up, so that my men may also be fully | armed, as the arms belongmg to my party have been confiscated by the French. If the French do not listen to my protest, I with my ofScers and men will join together to resist them. If the French are allowed to bring me down as far as Outhene the French will develop a much more hostile and high-handed attitude and seize the territory belonging to Siam on the Mekong, and thus the honour of the King will be tarnished, and blame will certainly fall upon you and me. I have only about 40 men but 1 am re- solved to serve His Majesty with all my power. I request you therefore to send me soldiers and men. Let them march by day and night, land if they arrive the King's enemies will not be able to adopt so high-handed an atti- tiide towards us" Mr. Page said he had two more witnesses on j his list, but he should not call them. If how- the prosecution wished to ask them any ques- Itions the defence would bring them into I Court, to give them an opportunity of doing so. ! The Advocate for the Crown said he did not I require them. I The Chief Justice said he thought they had , now had enough evidence,' and it was no use repeating what they had already had. If they had 200 more witnesses it would not throw any new light on the case. A conversation then ensued as to future proceedings and the Court decided to adjourn till Friday morning when. Lu- ang Sunthom (Advocate for tho Crown) would deliver his speech for the prosecution. The Court would then again adjourn until Monday morning when Mr. Page would speak for the defence. The judgment would probably be reserved for Tuesday. ■ » * ■ CoEBEOTiONs — We are asked to correct three points in oar report of Monday's proceedings. In Phra Yot's cross-ex- amination the question was asked "Did any one go with Koon Wang when he went to ask for Luang Anurak ; " it should have been " On the first occasion, when he went to ask," etc. The question " In your evidence you said that you stood (here till the house was burned oat, did not you" shoald have been, " In your evidence yoa said that you left there before the hoase was burned out ? " Phra Yot's reply in another instance was given " When I returned back to Wieng Krasene I then sent a letter to Laang Vichit, giving him an account of which had hap- pened ;" this should have been "I went to see Luang Vichit, and told him what liad happened." CORRESPONDENCE. [We do nob necessarily eaclocse the opiaioiis expressed by our Correspoadeats.J To THE Editor op the " Bangkok Times." SlE, I must ask you to correct an inaccurate ver- sion contained in Simn Observer of the evi. dence given by Nai Tooi, under cross-exaini — 35 — aation, and which, if not corrected, will reflect i upon the general knowledge and intelligence' of the officers of the Siamese Army. The portion of eridence to which I refer is as follows : — ■' Is there anything in military law permitting you to obey unsigned orders ? Tou must believe the messenger (look at PHEA TOT'S PROTEST. The following is a translation of the letter printed by us, in Siamese, on Saturday, and written by Phra Yot to M. Luce, on the occasion of the the surrounding circumstances.) I don't know former being expelled by the French from military law. because I am only a cap- ! the district over which ho was Deputy tem. What was actually said was "Do , Commissioner. Since the exact meaning Siamese military kws say that if the order -f ^.j^^ Erases used in the letter have such, a.rtTe^at?"l°a^l"S'NrEoiS -'-P'^^^^^ '^^ T Y""'' I dont know what the army law is on the ' i^®. 9°"'"*' ^^ '^°'^^^ .^*'® preferred re- point." army I am, etc., Phta ScKABAiTDEJO, (Adjutant General.) Acting Sub- Lieutenant. TENTH DAY, FRIDAY. 9th Mabch, 1894. The Court reassembled yesterday (Friday) morning, when there was only a small attend- ance of the public. The accused was absent, being suffering from an attack of fever. The Advocate for the Crown (Luang Sun- __ thorn) commenced the proceedings by asking • stlutely permission of the Court to deliver the address that the fraining from suggesting any particular view as to the meaning of the docnment, as is perhaps done by publishing a translation of it. As an English version, however, has appeared in our French contemporary, which doe.s not in our opinion give the full meaning of the phraseology of the letter, we now take an opportunity of appending a translation, made by Mr. Moiant for the use of the counsel for the defence, for whom he is interpreting. As regards the signification of the most important point in Phra Yot''8 letter, two of the leading Siamese experts 'whose decisions may be taken as ab- authoritative on questions of translation ) have given opinions for the Prosecution in Ensriish, so that j.u """";'*"'"";'"'."= 5" °f^ ':'>'.'"'""''., , Defence might hear what he wLs saying and : 7'"'/°/; Pi;,^'=''« ^ coinciding with that what they had to answer. He would give the ; ""^"P'^^ ^^ ^'•- ^o^'^^^' i" ^'^ v"si«>°- accused a copy of his address, written in Siam- 1 " I, Phra Yodh Miiang Kwing, Deputy ese, that he might also know what was passing. Commissioner of the Districts of Kamkurt The Chief Justice said the prosecution, j and Kammooan, write this letter, to you throughout, had been conducted in Siamese, ; the French Commander : I hereby com mit and the Judges themselves were Siamese, there- 1 to your care the territory of Kamkurt fore the Court must msist that the Advocate; and Kammooan with the interests therein for the Crown should address the Court mi „„_,.„• _j _u;i~ . i.,- t^ ~„i .Qo„i„„. ~. J ii. i. ii. /I I i! Ii- Ti. i contained, while making lormal declara- Siamese, and that the Counsel for the Defence i i- r .• P i i .. • ui should be supplied with a copy of the same *'°'' .°* """^ continued absolute rights in English. _ over It. Since His Eoyal Highness Prince Pra- chak Silparkom ordered nie to come up to administer the district of Kamku.rt and Kammooan, (territory which touches on the Annamite frontier at the Post called Tar Mooa) I have taken charge of the dis- trict and of the sub-ofScials and tlie inhabi- tants of various nationalities iu it, in peace prosperity and justice. But after many years had passed, ou the 23rd day of May in the year 112 of the Siamese era, you. and-, four French officers, having under you more than two hundred soldiers, came and plundered my stockade, und caused your soldieis tu LOme and surround and seize Loch myself and my officers and my men and pushed and thrust us forth by force uf arms and drove ua out from our stockade and would not permit me to stay and carry out my official duties and look after the interests of my Government, according to the orders of His Most Gracious Majesty, who is my Sovereign. Tou refused to let me stay, and thrust out both me and my officials and my sol- diers. The Advocate for the Crown said he had prepared his speech in English, and, as he was anxious that the case should go on, he suggested that his address should be interpret- ed into Siamese vina voce, sentence by sentence, aa he proceeded. The Chief Justice said the result of such a course would probably he unsatisfactory to both sides, and it would only waste the time of the Court unnecessarily, without advantage to the case. The advocate for the Crown then applied for leave to address the Court on the following morning (Saturday) at the usual time, so that he might be prepared to speak in Siamese. He undertook that an English version of his Siam- ese speech should be supplied to the Counsel for the Defence on Saturday. Mr. Page (speaking for the Defence) said that, under the circumstances, they would still like to address the Court on Monday, as origi- nally arranged but they would request that the address might be postponed to the after- temoon, instead of the morning, in view of their having lost that day. The Chief Justice said the Court acceded to this request, as being a satisfactory arrange- ment for both sides. The Court then adjourned till Saturday morning, at 10 o'clock. — 36 — I uow beg to ooinmit to your care the territory, with the sub-ofiSoials — the inhabi- tants and the Siamese interests therein, (while making formal declaration oE our continued absolute rights over it) until such time as I shall receive any instruc- tions, where-npon I shall arrange the mea- sures to bt) taken subsequently. Au.l I leijaii'C you to send this letter to "be laid before the Government of Prance and the Government of Siam, so that the matter may be examined into, and a Je- cision may be arrived at, and that terri- tory ui:iy be returned to Siam, whicli his- tory au'.J tradition have shown to bo hers, and t!) have been aJministered by her, nncil novv from the beginniufj. (Sij,'nerl), Pba Yodh Huang Kwang. | Note. •' Tlie autual copy of the foregoing letter, ) wliiuh was jjut into Conrt by the Advocates tor the : Crowu. was uot the orsfinal but a veraion of it . telejri-aphed out from Paris: and the reason of, this was thiit the orisfinal letter had been sent on i by thf Fi-cnt-h a'.ithnritiea in Siam to the Colonial j Office in Paris. , ,-i _t I In his evidence i^iveu on oath before the Court on March 3rd, Piu Touh stated that this tele- (^•aphed version omitted to give one sentence which he was in-actically cei-tain (so far as his memoiT served hiin) had been contained in tha original letter which he wrote. The sentence should come in after the words. •" Plundered my Stockade." , , , , „v.o> And it ran (he believes) thus ;— "And snatched y^^ •'awaymoneyandviiluablesandpropertybelongmg, • , f,f thp •Vdvot-at,-*! f},.i.,>i-il ■ lo the Kings Government which was meant for J-t is tne aut> ot tiie Adiocates-ljtiiaal. ••Government use; and also things belonging to according to Art. 'Jl ot the Decree to lonu •' the inlialritants and to myself and to my officials." and record, after the witnesses have lieen ex- » • • • * : amined, the questions of law and fact on which Tlie English used in this translation, tlie rijrht decision of the Court may depend. ilr. Moraub wishes us to piint out. We will now try to comply with this duty to the ed by Pra Yodhs letter, in ray opmiou, after consultation with some of the best authorities. I am, etc., K. L. MOEANT. P. S.— I would add that your Siamese version, as printed in your issue of Satur- day, breaks the letter by beginning a new paragraph between fni) and lirmx I now find that the break does not exist in the copy telegraphed from Paris, which is the document brought as evidence, the sentence being there practically a conti u- uous one, and this greatly aftects tlje meaning of the paragraph. R. L. M. TENTH DAY, SATURDAY. 10th March, 1894. The Bench iu this case took their seats this (Satm-day) morning at 11,20 immediately after the enti-auce of M. Hardouin into the Court. M. Ducos, Mr. Page, (for the defence) and Luang Sunthorn (for the i>roseeution) were absent, Nai Hasbamror delivered iu Sia- mese, the following speech for the Prosecii- must not be taken as representing the elegance or inelegance of the Siamese used by Phra Yot, iu his oriy;inal, for the trans- lation has been carefully worded with the sole object of giving tlie exact meaning of the original, rather than expressing the general tenour in rounded periods. Mr. ilorant sends us tiie following cor rection. SlE, You have already stated that you are 'ivhat occurred in KiengCheli l)est of our abilities rememliering the order ^vc;i iu the Decree by His Majesty the King, and which is clearfy applicable to all who have anything to do with the action of Justice that, in both the cases of Kieng Chek and of Tong- Eieng-Eham, we have only to consult our calm reason and our conscience, and that we must not allow ourselves to be misguided by any con- sideration of personal or national sympathy, so that the sentences passed by this Court may be as conformable as possible to truth and justice. Such is also, we are persuaded, the desire of the French Government, which first complaii^ ed, on information received in June 1893. of It seemed then glad to accept corrections of any inaccur- 1 according to the first information received by aoies cliat may appear in your report of ' ^^^ French authorities, that Phra Yot had the proceedings of the Special Court, since your only obioct, you .say, is to give a faithful and correct account to your readers. This being so, I would ask yon for space to say that ycur version of my translatiou of Phra Yodh's letter to Mons : Luce h.-is been taken from my first draft copy. The trausiution as finally given by me to -Mr. Page differs in some few respects from your published version. I enclose it, in case yon should care to publish it in your next issne, as siiowing more accurately than your yesterday's version the exact meaning which I have represented to Mr. Page as being convey- been guilty of the most atrocious and trea- cherous murder, that he himself had shot M. Grosgui-in when that unfortunate oflicer lay in his bed, imarmed and stricken down by fever. We are bound to say that this version must be abandoned, and that whatever may be the guilt of Phra Tot, there is nothing in the case which authorizes us to suspect him of having committed such vioLition of all laws of humanity and of mditaiy honour. The French Government, from which we had naturally to expect that all elements in support of the charge, and which were in its possession, should be produced, has not thought fit to produce any other evidence than the statements of the Cambodian inter- preter Boon Chan and the Annamite soldier, Nguyen Van Zhan. The first of them, has — 37 — given two declarations before the Siamese authorities when he was their prisoner ; after being released, he gave another declaration before M. Pavie the French Minister Resident in this Kingdom, and finally he was heard on his oath by this Court. The Annamite sol- dier Nguyen Van Khan has been heard, whilst lying still sick from his woimds in the mili- tary hospital of Saigon, by the learned Magis- trate who is now attending this trial ' as Representative of the French • Govern- 1 nient. It is on the version of both of them i that the accusation rests, and none of them ' accuses Phra Yot of having himself killed M. I Grosgurin, as was first reported. But if the murder was not committed under these especially atrocious circumstances, it may have been committed, directly or indirectly in some other way and this we ' have to examine impartially, by comparing the wit- nesses on both sides, stating in what they concur, and discussing the points where they differ, then examining if the facts, as thoy am found to have occurred, arc to be considered as constituting one or more of the crimcsi whereof Phra Yot is accused. Tliere are some facts on which, in their main elements, all witnesses seem to agree. Phra Tot was in command in the name of H. M. the King of Siam of the post of Kamuioun. ou what was then considered by the Siamese Government as iDeing the frontier between Siam and Anuam. On some ilay of the month of May, which appeai-s to Ih; the 22nd, but the exact date is immaterial, a French force came to Kauimoun, and,' after some hesitation, Phra Yot surrendered the post. Then Capt. Luce, who was in command of the French force, disarmed Phra Tot and his man, and, sent, them all away in the direction of Outhene, under the escort of Inspector Grosgurin and of twenty Annamite soldiers. It has been stated that before leaving Kammoun Phra Tot sent- a letter to Nai Eoi Tho(Nai Dm) at Outhene, stating, as he him- self admits, that he bad been obliged to de- liver up the post. At the same time he wrote to Capt. Luce another letter whereof the text appears to be as follows: — I Phra Tot Muang Kwang, Assistant Com- missioner of Muang Kam Kot and Kammoun, hereby deliver, under protest, the territory of, aud the interests contained in, Kam Kot and Kammoun, to the French commander. Prince Phrachak has been pleased to send me to ad- minister the province of Kam Kot and Kam- moun which forms part of the Kingdom of Siam where it borders on Annam on the Nam Bang at Dan Ta Muau. I have administered the district, and the officials and the people of all nationalities have for many years enjoyed peace and prosperity and justice. On the 23rd May 1893 you and four French Officers came with an escort of over 200 soldiers and surprised and assaulted my stockade, and you caused your soldiers to come and surrovmd and seize by force of arms and drive out of the stockade myself and my men. I refused to surrender, as I " was there by order of His Majesty my August Master to administer the country and to look after its interests. Monsieur the French commander would not allow me to stay. Ton drove me, my officials aud men out. I now deliver to you, under protest, the ter- ritoi7, the officials, the people, and the in- terests of the King of Siam until such a time as orders are received to further arrange matters. Let the French commander take this present letter and communicate its contents to the French Government and to the Siamese Government, and let them look into the matter an3 decide if the territory should be returned to Siam according to the proof of majis exist- ing of the territoiy which show it to l)e, accord- in{^ to tradition, a part of Siam, aud which Siam has always maintained to be originally hers. Phra Tot contends that there is one sen- tence missing in this Copy of his letter, and relating to' things which were taken from him by the French or Annamite troops. He and Luang Anurak and other witnesses also de- clare that violence wa? used against them and that nearly all their goods were taken away. But these points may be considered as irre- levant, because the question is not what the French did at Kammoun, but what the ac- cused did at Eieng Chek. We can thus abstain from discussing thein, M)d have only to state that the general sigui- lication of the letter which we have just read, is that Fhra Tot gives up under protest the post and territory of Kammoun and Kam Kurt to the French authorities, until the Siamese and French Government shall come to some final settlement on the matter or until he gets fresh instructions from his Government ; but even then it must be a sked if he thus did not implicitly engage him self not to commit any act of hostility against the French in order to reconquer these lost positions. During the journey between Kammoun aud Kieng Chek good relations seem to have subsisted between the accused and M. Grosgurin. It has been said on the French side that the escort was given to Phra Tot to protect him because he was disliked by the population. This is denied by Phra Yot and by the other Siamese witnesses as being untrue. But whatever be the truth it is certain that nothing happened to disturb the good harmony between the accused, and M. Grosgurin before they arrived at Kieng Chek. When there, M. Grosgurin went to stay in a Laos house and his Annamite soldiers went into two or three surroundmg dwellings. These houses were in the neighbourhood of the new shelter, where M. Grosgurin seems to have expected that Phra Tot would go with his party. But instead of this Phra Tot went to the ' old shelter which is situated nearly a mile further down along the river Nai Boon which flows by Kieng Chek. M. Grosgurin was surprised at this and sent his inteiijreter Boon Chan to ask for explanation. The explanation was that this jikce seemed more convenient because there was more space for the encampment of Phra Tot and his numerous party. But the real reason seems to have been that Phra Tot was there further away from M. Grosgurin and that he wished to escape from the control of the French Commander. — 38 — On the next day M. more anzioua. It had been told to him that Luang Anurak, who was Phiu Yot's assistant, had said to the people of Eanunoun that the Siamese would soon come back and take their post again. So he came with nine armed soldiers and took Luang Anurak as a sort of hostage, whom he intended to keep until he had got the necessarr boats to continue his expedition in the d&ection of Outhene, Gnjsgurin grew bodian Interpreter Boon Chan or the Anna- mite soldier Nguyen Van Khan ? 4. Did he himself take arms and ammunition which did not belong to him, or did he take the personal effects of M. Grosgurin or of the interpreter Boon Chan, or did he take 82 pias- tres which were in the latter's trunk ? 5. Did he himself set on fire the houses where M. Grosgurin and his soldiers were quartered ? and whom he refused to release when on the j If, as may be assumed, the answer to these same day Phra Tot sent one of his men to ask i several questions is a negative one, because for him.' I there is no evidence at all to support any Phra Tot after this went to Wieng Ktasene, : other answer, then we come to the more im- a place situated down the river Nai Boon at i portant series of questions, which now follow, four or five hours navigation from Eieng Chek, I first of fact, then of law : — and on the way to Outhene. There he met i i. -Was M. Grosgurin killed by the order with the Siamese troops which had been sent \ of phra Tot ? from Outhene under the command of Nai Tooi i 2. Was anv or were several Annamite sol- and Nai Plaak. How were these troops sent ? | ^iers killed bv the order of Phra Tot ? It must be fairly admitted that it was either 1 3 "Was Boon Chan the Interpreter or was on the receipt of the letter which Phra Tot 1 Nguyen Van Kham the Annamite soldier had sent from Kammoim or on the receipt j mounded by the order of Phi-a Tot ? of some other information sent by Phra Tot. j 4, -Were arms or ammunition which be- Whatever the fact may be, it is certain that longed to the French partv, or were the per- Phra Tot took this force or part of it, amount- j gonal effects of M. Grosgurin or of the inter- ing according to his statement to fifty men, ac- ; preter Boon Chan or were 82 piastres in the cording to the Annamite soldier to one hundred I latter's tnmk taken bv the orders of Phra men, and according to the Cambodian interpi^- . y gt v ter to two hundred men, and that in the mom- I 5/ "Were the houses where M. Grosgurin ing of the 3rd of June he came with this force i and his soldiers were quartered set on fire bv before the house occupied by M. Grosgurin. ! the orders of Phra Tot ? The witnesses heard from both sides are far] In these questions the words "bv the order from agreemg on the circumstances of the of must of eourse be understood as signifv- occuiTed. The sad result ! ing •• as a consequence of the order (or orders) given by." drama which then occuiTed. The however is only too well known : it was the kill- ing of the unfortunate French officer, of one Siamese officer, of a number of Annamite soldiers which has not been clearly stated, but which may be assumed to be about at least sixteen, of four or five Siamese soldiers, the wounding of the French Cambodian Interpre- ter, of three or four Siamese soldiers and of one Annamite soldier, and M. Grosgurin. To this set of tragic events, whereon as a matter of fact no discussion is possible, must be added, according to the declaration of the Cambodian interpreter. Boon Chan, the robbery of goods belonging to him or to M. Grosgurin. These are the first elements of fact on which the decision of the Court must necessarilv depend because of all these losses of lives, of blood and of property, as far as M. Grosgurin and his soldiers are concerned Phra Tot is accused of being responsible for having committed the five sorts of crimes enumerated in the Act of Information with the aggravating circumstance that the nature and gravity of those crimes was such as to create a cause of war between Siam and France. Let us now point out what are the other ques- tions of law and of fact whereon the convic- tion of Pia Tot for the aforesaid crimes will depend. The responsibility of Phra Tot for these facts may be direct or indirect. His direct responsibility will first depend upon the an- swer to the following questions. 1. DidPhra Tot himself kill M. Grosgurin ? 2. Did he himself kill any Annamite sol- dier? 3. Did he himself wound the French Cam- Supposing the answer to these questions to be afirmative, the questions of law are these : — 1. If the consequence of an order given by Pra Tot was thsft M. Grosgurin was killed, must not Phra Tot be considered therefore as having committed the crime of wilful and pre- meditated murder on M. Grosgurin ? 2. If the consequence of an order given by Phra Tot was that several Annamite soldiers were killed, must Phra Tot not be considered therefore as having committed the crime of wilful and premeditated murder on several Annamite soldiers? 3. If the consequence of an order given by Phra Tot was that either the Interpreter Boon Chan, or Nguyen Van Eham the Annamite soldier both were wounded, must not Phra Tot be considered therefore as having committed the crime of wilfully inflicting wounds uiion one of the persons aforesaid or upon both ? 4. If the consequence of an order given by Phra Tot was that either arms or ammuni- tion belonging to the French party or the personal efiects of M. Grosgurin or of the interpreter Boon Chan, or the 82 piastres which were declared to be in the latter's trunk, were taken'away, must not Phra T>jt be consi- dered therefore as having committed the crime of robbery of the aforesaid objects ? 5. If the consequence of the orders given by Pra Tot was the setting on fire of the house where M. Grosgurin and his soldiers were quartered, must not Phra Tot be consi- dered therefore as "having committed the crime of arson on aforesaid houses. — 39 — That the order to shoot was given by Phra Yot is admitted by himself. That the con- sequence of this order was the death of M. Grosg^n and of the greater part of the Annamite soldiers cannot be denied. _ It is also admitted that in consequence of his orders some arms were taken away. The question is more dubious as concerns the am- munition and the personal effects or money of M. Grosgurin and of the Cambodian Boon Chan, and for the setting on fire of the houses occupied by M. Grosgurin and by his party. We will therefore not insist on this point. But we mast point out that if Phra Tot had not given concurrently with Nai Tool and Nai Flaak the order to shoot, then M. Grosgurin and his soldiers would not have been killed, and Hoon Chan and Nguyen Van Kham would not have been wounded. Conse- quently this killing and wounding are neces- sary consequences ot the order given by Phra Tot with or without the assent of his two colleagues. "We suppose however that it will be objected by the learned counsel of th'j accused that these acts were committed in selfdefence or that the whole was a fact of war, or a military action. SelfdcfenoR is certainly an excuse when * about 12-15. the motives for selfdefence are serious.' " But it is clear that in the present instance I the best means of selfdefence would have : been for Phra Tot and his party to have ; left this post as soon as Luang Anural;' was released. ! As for the existence of ' ' ' ' ' must be remembered that have been their dissensions, Siam and Prance I seats at ].. 50, iminediateh- on tlie arrival were not at this time and have never since \ of the Fiench Representative, M. Ducos. been, m a sta e of declarec war. | Ti.ere was a lar-fa attendance, amongst „l Jofri * military action take , ^^^^ jj^. „„^ jj,. MacfaHaud, place as long as no war wasideolared ? \t\ -a ii, t> j -m ^ i.!. o ^ We leave it to the Justice of the > ourt I -^f- ^^''-^'' .*^^ ^^-.^^"^ Mrs. Smith, Capt advocates for the Crown themselves, expressed by them in fulfilment of their duty as Advocates for the Crown. For this reason the Court reminded the Crown Advocates that they must make another application to the French Representatives, as to whether they had any suggestions to make, in addition to what had already been said, in supix>rt of the charge, and, if they had, that those suggestions should be sent in before anything further passed in ' Court. The Court further reqiiested the Recorder to keep a copy of the original Siamese speech, to be at the disposal of the Court, as they could not say until after further consideration whether they should decide to make formal use of it or not. The Chief Justice asked whether Counsel for the Defence had any reply to make to the speech just delivererl. Mr. Tilleke said the speech for the Defence, with the permission of the Ci'iu-t, vrould be made at 2 o'clock on Monday. The Chief Justice, after a consultation oii the Bench, said the Court wouid adjourn till one o'clock on iMonday. The Court then adjourned accordingly. ELEVENTH DAY, I-IONDAY. 12 iH Maech, 1894. The proceedinjfs, ailjouim-ij from Satur- a fact of war it I day, were resumed in t!iis trial, on whatever may , Monday afteruoou, the Bench takioj' tlieii- to decide these points. The Chief Justice, at the conclusion of the address for the Prosecution asked the Advocates for the Crown whether or not they had yet received from the French Eepresentatives any suggestion or expression of their approval with regard to the speech which had just been made, in accordance with . Section 21 of the Royal Decree? Nai Hasbamror: We have been to see M. Ducos, the Representative of the French Gov- ernment, with a view to consulting him about this, and he said that he had no suggestions to make. We then composed the speech which we have just read. The Chief Justice then enquired if the speech had been submitted to the French Representa- tive, and whether M. Ducos had expressed approval of it. Nai Hasbamror : No, but I myself told M. Ducos all the substance of what I have just spoken to the Court and I requested him then to supply me with any suggestion which he had to make in addition ; and M. Ducos replied to me " I have nothing to suggest in addition." The Chief Justice said the Court must then consider that the speech as thus made was not fully in accoi-dance with section 21 of the Royal Decree, inasmuch as it did not contain the opinions or suggestions of the French Re- presentative ; it only represented the ideas of the Watton, Mr. D. Thompson, M. Mdme. and Mdile. Rolin-Jacquemyns, the Rev. Canon Greenstock, Luang Daiurong, and Messrs. Choem Srisararacks ami Aroon Preecha. The Chief Juslici.' asked the A.ivncates for the Crown (Luang Suiithorii au.i Xai Hasbamror^ whether thty ha. I foliowed his direction to apply to the Frtuch Ile|ire- sentative (M. Ducos), as to whalhe wi>hed to add or suggest to tlieir preseutati.m of the case. Nai Hasbamror said M. Ducos hi I been approached, but had declined to (■.\prc'.-s any opinion, as no Foieign Rcpre.-enta- tives could have any ofiicia' ciunection with tliafc or any other ihn.i the Inter- national Court. The Chief Justice offered to further adjourn the case if either side desii-ed it. Nai Hasbamror put iu the following 1 etter : — Bangkok, March 11th, 1894. Deab Sir, — In our last interview outside the Court, I had the honour to say that the form of raising the case did not concern me ; even if the ease were abandoned this would not necessitate my inteiTention. I would certainly commimicate with my Government, and would eventually ask for the Convention Tribunal ; but until the sent- ence is pronounced my paii; simply consists in 40 follonriug the proceedings in the case, and in collecting the elements for apolitical report, inde- pendent of the procedure. I have moreover, indicated to H. R. H. Pvince Devawongse, in a letter written previous to the opening of the proceedin)^, at what moment my connussion commenced, and in what it consisted. This letter, transmitted by the Itliniste."' of France, who acquiesced, on his part, in its coU' serious charges affecting his liberty and even his life, these charges being brought against him by his own countrymen and Government under pressure of a Foreign Power. I may frankly state to your Lordships that I do not feel that, in the remarks I am about tents, ought to have been communicated to his 4 to submit to you or on the conduct ot thu lase 'HiKhness, the President of the Court itself I have anything like done justice "to the (Sd.) Ducos. ' strength of myclieuts case ; but this is I trust Tho ('liiof Justice said that he could 1 chiefly and really due to the shortness of the not be i'es|jousible for any objection that i time which was at thv disposal of mvHflf iiud iniffht bf riiisad to the proceedinijs, under ^ ^7 colleagues, tlie circumstances. "^ ' Notwithstanding this disadvantage w have- Nil! Hi.sb.,m:-nr said the letter referred ' ^'"'efeded in biTiigmg to bght such ex- to h.A -..le to the Foreign Office, and ?^'^h strong fact« m favoiu: of my rlu-nt. , '^ , , • .. 1 ^ ii m the course of the exammation and rruKS- oaj;Ui X ■ Uive been co.nmuuicate.l to tlie examination of the various witnesses who have mf ' ,-, ■ L- r ■ I , ,1 , • ''**i' brought befoire this Court, that I am 0011- T!ie CliiefJustice said he Lad not'iing fid^nt that however weak my arguments aiv the to do wicU-tiiLi Foreign Office — it was uot ; facts themselves will prove their owii best ineiuiojii.vl in the Dooree, and he could arguments for showing the innocence and uot roui^guise it iu this case. If the honom- of my unfortunate client. Therefore E'oreiifu Office sent, him instructions he . I feel no doubt that your Lordships' judgraeut must refuse to recognise them. Wliiisc sit- ting a> -J u. lire iu that Special Court he could rt'coguiso uo superior authority of any kiud other than his Most Gracious Majesty. Tlie Court bad full power to deal with the case and if the Prosecution had not followed his instructions- to obtain suggestions fi-oiii M. Ducos that w.-vs their affai", uiit his. will restore him to liberty uot merely a free man. but a man honoured and respected for the ] irojior execution of his duty under very difficult luid trying circumstances, and I feel equally certiiiii that such judgment will meet with the appro- val of the whole civilized world. After these few remarks I will now proceed to the exami- nation of the charges contained in the Ac-t of Information. The charges brought against Phi-a Yot. under the Act of Information ai-e as Dr. H.i.y«, -.a this point, put in a medi cal certificate with respect to Phra Ybt's ■ follows : — state uf health. The certificate was to! , , „,.,, , , j-i. ^ j ■, 1.1, a- .. . u .. ^ a ■ c 1st. — Wilful and premeditated murder comiiut- the eftect that accused was suffering from , ted by himself or by his order on a French officer fever, and was still vomitting. His called Grosinuin. temperature was 102A degrees,' and his ; ?S^77^}V"^ ?p^ premeditated murder coiii- j-i- _ „i n J. 1 _ I J ..1. nutted by nimseli or by his order on an unknown conditioa was suc!i that lie would not he number, supposed to be between sixteen imd able to attend the Oourt for several d'lys. twenty-four Amiamite soldiers, bein^ a part of Tlie Advocate for the Crown said the the _ detachment eomnianded by said M. Gi-os- positiou of the Prosecution was a very *^S' a.,..,.„ j, i,.xj-i 1. -li? ,1 r. TTJ-] .1 1 •' 3rd.— Severe v.-oiind8 or bodily harm wilfully difficult one. He did not know the cou- mflicted by himself or by his orders on Boon teuta of the letter refen-ed to as havin"' Chan, Cambodian intei-pi«ter, and on Niniveu been sent to the Foreign Office, and M. i ^^n Khan. Amiamite soldier • T-, .,.. 1.1.1; 1 *tb. — Bobbery committed by himself or bv his Ducos said It was not meant for produc- ; orders of arms and ammunition, as also of the tion iu tliat Court. : personal effects of M. Gros^urin and of the Cam- .\Ir. Page, now said lie was in the saiue i ''?4'?" "^t^'y^ts^- ^oon Chan, and of 82 piastres -.• ii ,■ 11 I I which were m the latter s trunk, position as the prosecution were the other | stk-Arson committed by wUfully settins fire day. He bad got his address written i or ordering to set fire to the houses where II. out iu Buglish, but it had been impossible Grosgurin and his soldiers were quartered. to get the whole of it translated into Siamese. If the Court desired it, he could read the English vetsion that day and the Siamese version could be read on another day. The Chief Justice, after consultation with the other Judges, said that would be the best cpurso to take, though it mast be un lerstood that it was the Siamese version nit the English version that would be put on the official record of the Court. May it pletise your Lordships ; this is a case which may be fairly said to be unique in the annals of any countiy. We are here to defend a nobleman of high repu- tation, who has seiwed his country faith- fully for 8 years past, against the most I need not argue as to whether Phra Yot with his own hands committed anv of these offences, as even the prosecution are obliged to say that there is no evidence what- ever that he did so. This prosecution however go on to say that although none of these acts were done by Phra Yot with his own liaiuls, yet they were the consequences of Phra Yot's orders, and if these were the consequences, must not Phra Yot be held guilty of the charges brought against him ? I, on behalf of Phra Yot, join issue with the Prosecution on all the points and my reasons for so doing vary with the different points. As a preliminary note I will obseiTe that it is quite natural to argue that all the acts alluded to in the five clauses of the Indictment were practically the outcome of the . shooting which took place at Kieng Chek, and, without the — 41 — latter, would probably not have happened. As Phra Tot has admitted that he did give orders to shoot, I suppose that I also as his mouth-piece, must adiait it, although it appears to me Tery doubtful whether he ever did give such orders. I Avill at any rate call the attention of the Court to the fact that Phra Yot himself is the only witness, whether for the prosecution or for the defence, who says definitely that he (Phra Yot) did give an oriier to shoot. I therefore submit to the Court that in spite of what Phra Yot himself says, there is a very great probability that he never did give any such orders, and has merely now said that he did so, because he was generously unwilling that all the repon- sibility should lie on the shoulders of Nai Flaak and Nai Tooi. I will now go on to consider whether Phra Yot is guilty of any of the charges brought against him : and for that purpose I will first ai^^e the case on the supposition that every suggestion that M. Luce makes and every word that the Cambodian interpreter says, is true; and, at this stage, I will only brii^ in such other evidence in additiou as is not con- tradicted at all by that of M. Luce or Boon Ohan. It is uncontradicted that Phra Yot had been ai, Eam Kurt and Eammoun as deputy com- missioner for a period of 8 years, during which time, as far as we know from the evidence, no protest had ever been made by anyone against his occupation. On some day ' (not definitely fixed) in May 1893, M. Luce with a force numbering from two to three hundred' men, came to Xammoun and ordered Phra Yot to surrender the post of which he was in com- mand. Phra Yot refused to do so, and then after some little hesitation M. Luce proceeds to turn Phra Yot out by force. The exact amount of force used appears to me to be not a matter of importance, except as showing that Phra Yot, in leaving the post, onlv did so under compulsion from a superior force which he was not strong enough to resist, and in no way in consequence of any peaceful arrangement made amicably on both sides. M. Luce then proceeds to send Phra Yot down to Outhene under what he calls an escort of. twenty men. M. Luce says that this escort was sent for Phra Yot's own protection, although it is admitted that they had also a further duty given thcin to perform, namely to study the best means of communication between JCammoim and the Mekong. But it must be observed that M. Luce has nowhere hinted that Phra Yot asked for such an escort, M. Luce says as follows : — " I said, to the Kha Luang that as he had compelled me against my will to use violence against him, when he refused to accede to my argu- ments and to leave willingly and in a proper way, I would immediately gather all necessary means of transport to convey him to Kieug Chek with his party and with all his belongings. I would give to escort him an officer . nd civil guards in order that he should n t have difficulties during his i Tovage Willi the inhabitants who did not The letter sent by Phra Yot to M. Luce shows sufficiently how very much against his will he took his departure. At any rate, Phra Yot then departed from Eieng Chek with the escort or guard. The prosecution say Hirni, there were har- monious relations between Phra Yot's party and M. Grosguriu's as far as Kieng Chek: but I must say I fail to see any evidence of such harmonious feelings m the side of Phra Yot. He was obliged to do whatever his armed escort chose to order liim to do, and that was all. It is evident that at some time during the journey he succeeded in sending a letter to the military officer at Outhene named Nai Um, describing his condition. However, to follow the version given by the Cambodian intei"pretor, the party arrived at Eieng Chek, and Phra Yot went to the site of a former rest house abt>ut 15 minutes further down, instead of going to the new Restr house. Q-rosgurin, rendered suspicious by this and by other things which he had heard, goes and arrests Phi'a Yot's Lieutenant named Luang Anurak and refuses to give him up although Phra Yot makes a fonual and civil demand for his release, and although he is told that his refusing to do so will be a breach of the treaty. Plira Y^t then escapes to Wieng Kraseue. He then returns to Kieng Chek with about 200' soldiers (according to the Cambodian interpreter's story). These soldiers were en- camped for two hours close to Urosgurin's house (as the Cambodian has told us.) Af- ter these two hours had elapsed they ap- proach G-rosgurin's house, and then — again following the Cambodian interpreter's story — they without making any demands, com- mence shooting at the French party : — but the Cambodian interpreter is not sure whe- 'ther the actual first shot fired came from Phra Yot's party or not. firing is then con- tinued on both sides, and eventually 16 or 17 Annamite soldiers are killed, Grosgurin is killed, and the Cambodian interpreter is wounded. These orders to shoot were by his own ad- mission, given by Phra Yot in conjunction with Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak. During the fighting, the house took fire, and this (accor- ding to the Cambodian interpreter) was caused by deliberate inceudiaiy efforts on the part of Phra Yot's men though he has never said, or even suggested, that he knows Phi'a Yot himself gave such an order and Phra Yot himself denies it utterly [so that the suggestion that Phra Yot was responsible for the house catching fire must be abandoned, even on the story given by the Cambodian inter- preter.] Finally, Phra Yot's party are said to have carried off the goods and property belong- ing to theCambodian interpreter and the French pa> ^, besides guns and other munitions of war. ilere again it is not stated that Phra Yot himself is known to have been respousiblc for ordering any s\ich proceeding, except as regards the arms, which it is always the custom to remove after a battle, as beini; government property. Now, even if we assume as I have just been doing for the purpose of argument, that eveiT like "him " It may therefore be taken as , wordof the story, as I have just sketched it, were certain that Phra" Yot did not ask for any I true, (which we deny) -stiU the question °T would arise — Do the acts of Phra Yot even escort. — 42 — then amount to crimes? or were they not Goremment of Prance and the GoTermnent rather acts fully justified, nay rather ren- of Siam, so that the matter may be enquired dered absolutely neccessaiy, under the circum- into, and a decision may be arrived at; and that stances in which even thit version of the stoiy territory may be returned to Siam, which says that he was placed^ maps, history and tradition &c. &c. With a view of finding the right answer ; Now even if these words stood alone, I thinj • to this question we must consider two points i that the contention of "parole" cannot b» which have been suggested by the line of the i considered a sound one, in the absence ot prosecution's arguments as being specially any definite pledge that he would do nothing supposed to demonstrate Fhia Yot's guilt. until the matter was finally settled. Bid Fhra Yot give a parole of any kind Taice an example to illustrate this: — to the French authorities, when leaving Eam- Suppose, when the blockade was going on mouu, that he would not actack them ? Did he entice the escort to any particular place with the deUberate intention of com- passing their death ? (a.) There has been no evidence given by the prosecution and not the slightest sugges- tion made by M. Luce, that any such promise was definitely given in so many words. But as far as I can understajid, it has been sug- gested that such a promise is implied or in- volved in the letter sent by Fhra Tot to M. 'Luce, just before leaving Eammoun. This letter is as follows : — " I Phra Todh Miiong, Kwloig, Deputy Com- missioner of the Districts of Eamkurt and Kamniooan, write this letter, to you .the French Commander : I hereby commit to your care tl)^ territory of Kamknrt and Eammooon with the interests therein contained, while malriTig f orm^ declaration of oar continued, absolute rif^hts over it. Since His Boyal fli^hness Prince Prachak Silparkoni ordered me to come up to administer the district of Kamkort and Kammooan, (terri- tory which touches on the Annamite frontier at the Post called Tar Mooa) I have taken charge of the district and of the sub-officials and the inhabitants of various mftipnalitiea in it, in peace prosperity and justice for many years. But on the 23rd day of May in the year 112 of the Siamese era, you, and four French officers, havini; under you more than two hundred soldiei's, came and plun- dered my stockade, and caused your soldiers to uome and surroond and seize both myself and my officers and my men and pushed and thrust us forth by force of arms and drove us out from our stockade and would not permit me to stay and carry out my official duties and look after the interests of my Grovemment, according to the ordei-s of His Most Gracious Majesty, who is my Sovereign. Ton refused to let me stay, aud thrust out both me and my officials and my soldiers. I now beg to commit to your care the territory, with the sub-officials — the inhabitante and the Siamese interests thcrain, (while making formal declaration of our continued absolute righte over it) until such time as I shall receive any instruc- tions, whereupon I shall anrange the measures to be taken subsequently. And I require you to send this letter to be laid before the GoveiTunent of Fi-ance and the Gov- ernment of Siam, so that the matter may be examined into, and a decision may be ar- rived at, and that tenitory may be returned to Siam, which maps, history and ti-adition have shown to be hers, and to have been administered by her, until now from the beginning. (Signed), Pea Todh Mtiang Kwang. Now as far as I can see the only part of this letter from which — even by straining the sense — such an undertaking could be implied are the following words : — "I now beg to commit to your carie the territory, with the sub-officials and inhabitants and Siamese interests therein, — and I require you to send this letter to be laid before the here in July last year, that an Eaglish man- of-war had been ordered by the French to- po outside the blockade limits. Suppose tue Captain of that English man-of-war bad written a letter to the French Commander saying — " Well, under the circumstances I " will go, but I require you to lay the matter " before our respective Governments, so " that the matter may be enquired into, and " a final, decision arrived at. " Suppose again that the Captain communicated to- the Admiral all that had taken place, and that the Admiral at once commanded hini to return and resist by force any expulsion — would anyone contend for a moment that what he had before written to the French Commander would bind him (as if by a parole) to wait in inaction until the English and French Governments had finally settled the whole matter? Could it possibly be contended that until England and France had settled the question, he could not insist on returning to his original position even though he (the Captain) received definite orders in the meantime from his Superior Officer to return to his former position ? It appears to me to be perfectly clear that no such argument could or would be sug- gested, it woubl be taken as a matter of course that he was bound to obey bis Admiral. So also with Phra Tot. ISut in Phra Tot's case, the question is absolutely removed even from any possibility of being argued on the above lines, by the addi- tional fact that in another paragraph in the same letter Phra Yot distinctly says " 1 do this, until such time as I shall receive any instructions, whereupon I shall arrange the measures to betaken subsequently." In fact it is perfectly evident that what was meant by the whole of the letter taken together is simply this : — "You force me to leave the territory which I say belongs to the King of/ Siam (whether it does so belong or not must depend upon the ultimate decision of our respective Governments) 1 meanwhile shall act, as far as I am able, upon any orders that I may receive from my superiors. " We have thus disproved the suggestion that Phra Yot had given any sort of parole to Mons. Luce that he would remain in peace- ful aud friendly relationship. (b) We now come to the point as to whether Phra Yot enticed Mons. Luce to send the party with him, with the express- design of massacring them at a convenient spot. Neither in M. Luce's report to M. Lanes- san nor in the Cambodian interpreter'*; — 43 evidence is there a particle of evidence that he did this. The ntmost M. Luce says is that he sent the escort to protect Phra Tot, not that Phra Yot asked for it or wished for it. On the contrary, it appears to me quite evident from M. Luce's report that he chose to send that body of men with two objects (i) to see that I'hra Yot really left that territory and to force him to do so, (ii) to discover the best route to the Me- kong. Though the prosecution have not actually said so, yet it is quite evident from the way they clutched at Phra Tot's letter to Nai Roi To Nai Um (on the end of which were hastily writtten Luang Vichit's orders to Nai Tooi) that this letter is the only means they can anywhere discover to support their suggestion that Phra Yot deliberately laid a snare for the French party. Yet it is quite evident even from this very letter itself, that Phra Yot did not for a moment contemplate massacring Grosgurin's party, as is suggested, since he says in it that it is only m the event of the French refus- ing to listen to his protest that he and his officers and men will join together to resist them. Listen to what "protest"? Evi- dently tfiat they should release himself and his officials and evacuate the territory. From the plain meaning of the whole evi- dence it is clear that the escort was not sent by the French iu response to any request made to them (by Phra Yot) with the secret intention of luring his escort, if he obtained it, far away from their reserves and then treacherously falling on them and mas- sacring them. But It now remains -to show, still using only the evidence brought by the prosecution, that no guilt attaches to Phra Yot in any other way, but on the" contrary that he was fully justified in all his act^ions, and this for the reasons which I will now give. — Thus. The evidence of M. Luce's report shows : 1. That the French party entered and occu- pied territory which was de facto in the posses- sion of the Siamese. 2. That they not only occupied the territory, " but that they actually by force of arms and overwhelmingly superior numbers drove out and disarmed the Siamese Governor of that territory. 3. That they sent an armed force to lead Phra Yot (reduced to unarmed helplessness) out of the territory. These three points are all (as it appears to me) clearly acts of war committed by the French, which fully justified any reprisals on the part of Phra ■ Yot or any other Siamese official. Now it is perfectly clear that if one side commits acts of war, the other side are also justified in committing acts of war in return. And I can nowhere find it laid down that they must Umit these acts of war to exactly the same a<;ts of war as those which, hare been committed by the other side. Furthermore, besides the acts of war thus implied by M. Luce's evidence, the evidence of the Cambodian interpreter shows that the French actually arrested and imprisoned and refused to surrender Phra Yot's Lieutenant, named Luang Anurak, despite Phra Yot's formal protest that their persistence iu this would be a distinct breach of the Treaty. This last point shows clearly that even if Phra Yot had (as was contended) agreed to go quietly down to Outhene, yet now rather that the escort ( as it IS called ) had been forced upon Phra . _ . . Yot against his will, and ,that Phra Yot I *^3 ^ew action of Grosgurin, in arresting the wished, in consequence, to 'have an armed I Lieutenant, distinctly broke any ties of force at his disposal which would enable him friendship existing between Phra Yot (or his to say to the French authoritatively and I country) and the French, effectively • "^ I ^^^ therefore I now maintain that even if " Desist from forcing me ajid my officials out \ '* ^'^, ^"^ fr'^'^'^K V^^^ ^^T^'f" u" of my rightful territoi| and retire yourselves 1^"^"^^ has not been) that Phra Yot actually to your own boundaries." And it is' certainly l^«^'\,^'' ''^*^^ "P""^ the French party, w.th implied that if the French would have listened P^°. °*^,f cause or pretext than the refusal *^. ij u 1. i 1 1 oriiirmauy made bv Grossrurm to Phra Yots no strong measures would have been taken. , ^^ = ^^J^^ ^^^ ^-j^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ ,^^^^^^^ ^^^ Therefore I say that— taking M. de Lanes- 1 phra Yot would have been entirely justified san's Beport, the evidence of the Cambodian ■ in the course he took, simply by "what had interpreter and the letter of Phra Yot, — there ' already occurred — sincethe arrest of his Lieiite- is nothing in any of them to show either 1 nant was certainly a fresh act of violence. committed after M. Luce had accepted that (a.J That Phra Yot gave any parole not to escape or not to take hostile measures against the French, or (b.) very letter of Phra Yot which (it ^js-s con- tended) implied that pacific relations would Ihj I maintained between the two parties. Taking into consideration thin the three dis- tinct Acts of War committed by the French under M. Luce, as above enumerated — together with the subsequent arrest of Luang Auurak as being a further act of war — and assuming, as I hiave above stated that acts of war ■■ ,; T.I.. viiL i-f u * always justify acts, of war in return — it follows been clearly stated by Phra Yot that if he got ^.j^^. ^^ n,eagures which were afterwards taken orders he would act c \ them. ^^ pj^^ yot had abeady received full and We have thus show li — using still only the eufficient justification from the action of the evidence brought by the prosecution — that Phra French, even without Phra Yot receiving any Yot cannot possibly be shown guilty of the definite new instructions to effect reprisals, accusations in the Indictment whether by But it is not denied that Phra Tot received That Phra Yot lured the detachment of French soldiers down to Kieng' Chek or elsewhere, with a view to murdering them. Neither of these suggestions can possibly be maintained as true; on the contrary it had hiealkmg parole or cherous assault. by planning out a trea- orders, and definite orders too They were con- tained in (1) a letter received by him sometime — 44 — after leaving Kaminouu, written to him by Luang Vichit. the general at Outhene, who was his commanding officer, and (2) orders delivered to him by two of Luang Vichit's gub- lieutenants, name^ Nai Tooi and Nai Flaak, and conveyed by them to him as coming directly from Luang Vichit. Now assuming, as I am at present doing for the purposes of argument, that the story ■ of the Cambodian interpreter is in all respects true, it mi^ht perhaps here be contended that, as the orders given by Luang Vichit were simply to demand the release of Luang Auurak and to insist on the French leaving the territory, they were not justified in beginning to shoot without first making a definite demand for his release; aad the Cambodian interpreter declares this was not done. lu answer to this I reply, firstly that Phra Yot had already' demanded that Luang A'lurak Khould be given up, and that the release had buen definitely refiised, as is allowed by the evidence of the prosecution and, therefore, Phra Tot was not bound to repeat his demand a second time, but rather to take that fir.st refusal as final, and so shoot at once. ijeuondly that, according to the story given by the Cambodian interpreter, Grosguiin Imew, two hours beforehand, what this party was coming to ask for, and, as Luang Anurak was not permitted to go and join the Siamese party during all those two hours that fact might certainly ba taken as a continued refusal to release him. So, in this respect, too, Phra Yot was justified in appealing at once to arms BO as to effect the release. Thirdly, that the Cambodian interpreter is not certain as to which side first fired ; and, therefore our evidence, stating most clearly ] that the French were the first to fire, goes uncontradicted, and so gives proof of yet another casus betti : which gave great additional justification to Phra Yot to commence firing; nay more it absolutely compelled him to do so, vmless he and Nai Plaak and Nai Tooi were all to be faithless to their duty to their King and'couutry. I consider I have thus shattered the conten- tion by which it has been attempted to show that Phra Yot was not justifiel in shooting without first demanding Luan;^ Anurak' s release then and there. Bat a further contention has b3eu raised by the Prosccutiou. whicli I must also reply to, nam»ly, that Plira Yot's proper course of action would have been to retiro iminaJiately he had obtained the person of Luang Anurak. This appear.^ to me a most utterly absurd proposition, wliich would be scouted as ridi- culous by every soldier in the world. The sug- gestion imputes tliat a large force of Siamese ought a:'tually to withdraw before a smaller force of French soldiers, and this after having had two or three of th(jir own men killed, bi'sidijs laying themselves open to being shot down when in retreat ; such an idea is absolutely ridiculous and preposterous.' Moreover Phra Yot would have been dis- obeying orders had be done so. For his orders were not only to secure Lnang Anurak, but also to force the French to retire from the twritory. Had Phra Yot therefore retired (in the manner suggested in this ridiculous proposition) he would hav ' been branded as a coward for the rest of hii^ days, and would have merited the punishme^ i; of death under Section 18, volume 2 of the laws of Siam, which says — " If he runs away from the &aemy heis liable to be punished with death, and his wife and property are all liable to confiscation." As to the question of Arson, I offer two remarks : — 1. The only evidence of the prosecutiim is that of the Cambodian interpreter, who says that he saw Siamese soldiers setting the house on fire ; but he nowhere says that he hoard any order given by Phra Yot (or anyone else) for this to be done. And it would certainly be a most unheard of thing for a commander to be held respousible for every act of hin soldiers, done without orders from him. If such were the custom no general would ever be safe from punishment. 2. I am not aware that setting a house on fire for the purpose of comijelliug a defending force to quit it is unjustifiable, in military en- gagements, under the International Bules of War. Next as to the Robbery. If Phra Yot's other actions were (as we have shown) • justifiable, it is perfectly clear that he was justified in taking possession of^e arms, etc., on behalf of the Siamese Government, and even if he did take possession of two boxes of M. Grosgurin's there would be nothing wrong in taking away the goods left on the field of battle by an enemy who had disappeared to a man, so long as he forwarded the things to his official superiors. But, here again, even the Cambodian inter- preter does not say that Phra Yot himself took I possession of the boxes, or that he was robbed by Phra Yot himself, or even by Phra Yot's orders, nor doeS he say that he made any complaint to Phra Yot at the timo of such robbery, which might have helped to suggest that Phra Yot was cognisant of any such rob- bery. It follows, therefore, that Phra Yot has in no way been shown, even by the evidence of the prosecution, to have bean responsible for this robbery — if there was one — provided he was (as we have shown that he was, even on the prosecution's evidence) ju: O. Feankpuetbr fh. d. Bangkok, Uth March 1894, [Seeing that M. Duces' letter bad been handed into Court, and being under the impression that it was an official document, we made application for a copy. Br. 5. 211 16tb March, 1894. The Proceedings were again resumed, yester day afternoon, at 1.45, among those preseni being Mr. Choem Sri Sararacks, Mr. Westen- holz, Mr. Prayune, Mr. Hendricks, Luang Damrong, and a considerable gathering of Sia- mese gentlemen. The Advocate for the Crown (Luang Sun- thorn) who spoke in vigorous and incisive style, addressed the Bench, on behalf of the Prose- cution, as follows : — The ' Counsel for the defence have insisted extremely on the fact that the accused was entirely covered in what he did on the instruc- tions which he received, and they have inferred from this that the responsibility of Phra Yot, for whatever he did, was covered by the orders of his superiors, and that, if he had such orders, he acted in perfect accordance with the conclusions of his letter to Capt. Luce. This letter, which the accused lumself admits having sent to Capt, Luce, textually as it was communicated to the Siamese Legation at Paris, with only a slight variance, unimport- ant for the present discussion, is of such weight for the decision of our case that I must ask the permission of the Court to read it again. Here Nai Hasbamror read Phra Tot's letter to M. Luce, already published several times. The meaning, said the Advocate for the Crown, is very clear. Pra Tot imdertakes not to attack the French until he re- ceives fresh instructions, and to wait patiently until the two Governments have decided to whom the disputed territory must finally be- long. This certainly appears to be the meaning of Phra Tot's letter. But it may be doubted if the accused*ever meant to fulfil this obli- gation. The reason for doubting, I take from the contents of his letter to Nai Boi To Nai Um, whereby he asks to .be supplied with arms, etc., etc. Nai Hasbamror then read the letter from Phra Tot to Nai Eoi To Nai Um. The Advocatp for the Crown proceeded: The counsel for the defence contends, how- ever, that Phra Tot really received instructions or orders ; but they fail to prove it. Neither Phra Yot nor any of his witnesses in Court ever said that such written instructions wen- sent to Phra Tot by his superior. The only orders he referred to in .his evidence were the verbal instructions conveyed to him by Nai Tool • Nai Hasbamror here read the orders said to have been sent by Luang Vichit to Nai Tooi, and. The Advocate for the Crown went on to say: It must be remembered that these supposed orders from Luang Vichit had no signature, and your Lordships will remember that in the vritten orders may have been ia,brica,U;a. after the event. I need only say that if anyuue had determined on fabricating orders to nuit the case, he would probably have mauu a much more apparently forcible affair of it, by writing appear on it. No, my Lords, the very sim- plicity and naturalness of the document stamp* it as being unquestionably genuine. We have thus shown that Phra Tot had definite instructions which he was compelled to carry out ; but the prosecution now maintain that Phra Yot was not justified m taking any active measures against Qrosgurm, firstly because he had acquiesced without any protest in the arrest of Luang Anurak ; and secondly because on the day of the fight he omitted to make a formal demand for Luang Anurak before taking those active steps. In answer to the first of these contentions we say that the evidence of the Cambodian in- terpreter himself has clearly shown that Phra. Tot did — through Khoon Wang — make a definite formal protest on the day of the arrest, distinctly stating that the treaty would be broken if he was not released. As regards the second contention we make two replies: — The Cambodian interpreter has- himself stated, both to M. Pavie and in this Court, that he (Boon Chan himself) was told by the party at the shelter that they had arrived at Kieug Chek with the special object of obtaining Anurak's release, and of speaking to the French Captain (Grosgurin) on the sub- ject. Ovir six witnesses independently show that Khoon Wang did definitely speak with Grosgurin about the release of Anurak before any firing took place ' on either side. That Boon Chan should deny this, as the Advocate for the Crown states, whether four times or forty times or four hundred times, does not make the denial any stronger than if he only denied it once, as taJcen against the unshaken testimony of our six independent witnesses on the same point. However if the prosecution consider that the repetition of the same state- ment, by the same individual, several times adds any strength to the credibility of that statement, we shall be most happy to call our six witnesses that they may each make their statements 4, times, or 40 times or 400 times, too! The Prosecution have made a fourth criticism, viz, as regards the actual number of our party on the day of the fight. We have stated that there were about sixty all told: and the Annamite soldier's estimate of 100 is much nearer to this estimate of ours than it is to that of Boon Chan, who puts our number at from two to three hundred. The Advocate for the Crown also attempted to show that the largeness of our number is absolutely proved by the smallness of the num- ber of our killed — I should have certainly thought that the argument cut just the other way, as it is clear that shooting into a crowd will afford a bigger mark to shoot at, and will therefore produce a greater number of slain than shooting into a small number would do. Therefore the contention of the Prosecution on this point fails and does not, I submit, in any way lessen the general credibility of our witnesses. I think your Lordships will agree that I have thoroughly disposed of the extremely flimsy arguments which the Prosecution found themselves obliged to put forward, if they at- tempted in any way to meet our case. I can of course agree with — and sympathise with — it as a separate letter and taking good care ymy learned friends in the fact that there was that some signature of Luang Tichit should'' certainly nothing better that they could scrape — 55 together wherewith to support their own case or to defeat ours. Finally, to sum up, we respectfuUv remind your Lordships that, according to the Eoyal Decree constituting this Speeial Court, the final judgment is to answer the following question : — " Is the accused guilty of having committed the cnme or crimes which is or are imputed to him '■" , ' Now there are five separate crimes imputed to Phra Yot under the act of Information : i i^f^J^"^?!; "^^ premeditated murder commit- ted by himself or by his order on a French ofacer called Uroseurin. ■^^jT^^"^ and premeditated murder com- mitted by himself or by his order on an onknown number, supposed to be between sixteen and twenty-four Annamite soldiers, being a part of the detachment commanded by saidM. Grosgurin, . 2V^"~Severe wounds or bodily harm wUfully mflicted by himself or by his ordei-s on Boon Chan, Cambodian interoreter, and on Nguyen Van Khan, Annamite soldier. 4th.— Robbery committed by himself or by his orders of arms and ammunition, as also of the personad effects of M. Grosgurin and of the Cam- bodian inteipreter, Boon Chan, and of 82 piastres which were in the latter's tmnk. 5th.— Arson committed by wilfully setting fire or ordering to set fire to the houses where M Grosgniin and his soldiers were quartered. And in considering the true answer to the above question we will first limit the question to the first three charges only. We respectfully submit that in view of the evidence and arguments which we have ad- duced, the only possible answer is that the accused is not guilty of having committed these three crimes ; and for this reason : — ^viz that although Phra Yot was present at Eieng Chek when M. Grosguriu and the Annamite soldier were killed, and when " the severe wounds and bodily harm " were inflicted, — yet we have alleged and proved the exist^ce of facts which constitute "a legally allowable excuse" — to quote the terms used in the Boyal decree, § 24. paragraph 3. This "legally allowable excuse" comprises the following points : — He was justified by the state of war which had been initiated in that region by the actions of the French, both at Eammoun and at Eieng Chek, as my learned colleague has given in detail. He was justified by the receipt of definite orders from his superior officer to take active steps against the French if they did not evacuate the territory; which orders were authorised by the responsible head of affairs at Nong Khai, and have been approved and sanctioned by His Majesty's Supreme Gov- ernment in Bangkok. He was justified by the action which the French party took on the occasion itself : viz. their commencing to fire upon him while he was still parleying for the release of Luang Anurak. We have thus answered the mam question of guilty or not guilty as regards the first three counts of the indictment. Now as regards the question of guilty or not guilty on the 4th and 5th charges, namely the robbery and the arson. We again say the answer can only be not guilty; and this for two reasons :— first because even if the burning of the house aad the removal of the goods were cf^m- mitted under the deliberate and intentional orders of Phra Yot. yet such actions did not under the circumstances constitute the crimes of arson and robbery ; since they were not crimes at all. but were part and parcel, of the acts rendered justifiable and necessary by the same reas jns that we have just given above when speaking on the first three count.'? of the indictment; and secondly because all the evidence goes to show that the setting fire to the house and the . removal of the goods were not results of any orders given by Phra Yot himself, except as regards the removal of arms and ammunition, which again is justifiable for the above stated reasons. Therefore in answer to the question of guilty or not guilty, as regards one and all of the charges in the Act of Information, we respect- fully submit that the only just answer must be not guilty, and we therefore ask — in the terms of the Decree — that this Honorable Court shall declare the accused "quit and discharged of the accusation." The Court then adjourned till one o'clock to-day, (Saturday) when judgment will be delivered. EOURTEENTH DA Y.SATURDAY 17th Makch. 1894. Accused Acquitted. The summing up and Judgment in the Tong Chieng Kam Afiair, under the Boyal Decree instituting the Special Court to try Phra Yot of the crimes set forth in the Act of Information, were delivered in the Eoyal Court of Justice on Saturday, by H. K. H. Prince Bidjitpryakom, the Chief Justice with as Jud- ges T. E. Phya Siharaj Dejojai, Phya Abhai- ronaridhi, Phya Devesr Wongse Vivadh, Phya Dhammasaranitti, Phya Dhamma saranetti, and Phya Bidhirong Bionached. Luang Sunthom Kosa and Nai Hasbamror appeared as advocates for thtj Crown and Messrs. Page and TiUeke and the Siamese advocates Nai Mee and Nai Eaat, for the Defence. There were present Mr. J. G. Scott, c. i. E. (British Charge d' Affaires) Mr. Newman, Mr. Louis Xavier (Portuguese Consul) Chev. Eeun de Hoogerwoerd (Consul-General for the Netherlands) Mr. E. Wiede (Austro- Hungarian Consul) Mr. Beckett, H.. B. M. vice-Consul, the Eev. Canon Green8-.bck, Phya Woodt, Hr. Choem Sri Sararacks, Bev. E. P. Dunlap, Luang Chammong, Mrs. Scott, Mrs. CoUins, Mrs. Hays, Misses McFarland and Loftus, together with a number of other resi- dents both European and Siamese. The Court was crowded to its utmost capacity, and large numbers were unable to obtain admission while every one appeared to evince the keenest interest in the proceedings. The French Be- presentatives, the officers of the Court, the members of the Law and the Eepreseiitatives of the Press were present shortly after 1 p.m. The Chief Juitice, entered Court at 1.45 p.m. and after briefly conversmg with the French Bepresentative took his seat on the Bench. The Becorder, in reply to the Chief Justice, said Phra Yot was so ill that ho was in ;u3ed was going to fight him, aud that' he had sent out people to get tools for making a stockade. After two days M. Grosgurin, with his interpreter and ten soldiers, come to the accused and wanted to arrest Luang Anurak. the assistant of the accused, under the plea that Luang Anurak had used threats to the people whilst at Eammoun, stating that the Siamese would return and fight. Luang Anurak refused to go, and M. Grosgu- rin and his soldiers dragged him away by force, and he was kept in custody in the house of M. Grosgurin. At that time, the accused did not say anything. In the afternoon the accused sent one of his followers to M. Grosgurin to ask for the release of Luang Anurak, stating that the accused would con- sider it as a "breach of the Treaty" if Luang Anurak were not handed over to him. M. Grosgurin did not comply with this request, but stated that Luang Anutak was all right where he was. (This was Boon Chan's state- ment.)In the evening some one told the accused that M. Grosgurin intended to arrest him and his followers. The accused thought the act done by M. Grosgurin to Luang Anurak an act of violence and he was afraid of being exposed to a similar one if he remained. He there-upon called his people together and went the same evening, by boat, to Wieng Krasene, which is at a distance of between 4 and 5 hours. On the road he met about 50 people from Outhene, who brought provisions for him ; and he told them to return with him. When he arrived at Wieng Krasene he met Nai Tooi and Nai Flaak, two officers, with an escort of about 50 men. The two officers informed him, officially, that Luang Yichit Sarasate, the Commissioner of Outhene, knew that the French had taken, by armed force, MuangEammoun, and had arrested the accused; he therefore had ordered them (Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak) to assist the accused, with 50 men M. Grosgurin, who was iu his bed room, and who remained there until he was shot and died. Li his evidence before this Court, Boon Chan"ave evidence in conformity with the statement of the accused and witnesses for the Defence. When the Siamese soldiers came up to the house M. Grosgurin was standing in front of the house, at the top of the staircase. Witness explained the matter to Koon Wang, who had come to ask for the release of Luang Anurak, and was waiting on the ground in front of the staircase. Witness translated what Koon Wang said to M. Grosgurin, and then told Tiim that M. Gros- gurin would not release Luang Anurak. Koon Wang then asked for the belongings of the accused, which the French had taken and, further, that M, Grosgurin should leave the territory. M. Grosgurin said he had not the the belongings with him, and therefore he covdd not return them. At that time the ac- cused caUed Luang Anurak to come to him, according to the evidence for the prosecution and defence. The evidence of Boon Chan and the witnesses for the defence differed again. At the time M. Grosgurin returned to the room, and witness followed him, and heard shots in front of the house, witness was under th% impression that the Siamese soldiers had fired, as there were only Siamese soldiers in front. There were no Annamite soldiera because they were all over the house and had not prepared for resistance. Nguyen Van Khan, the Annamite soldier, a witness for the prosecution, however, stated that when the Siamese soldiers arrived witness was on sentry duty on the staircase, and that the Siamese solders at once commenced firing, and that his jiarty returned the fire. In the evidence of this witness notbingis mentioned about parleying. The witness further stated that he heard gunshots in the house. The evidence of the accused, and of the witnesses for the defence, and the Siamese to get him released from the French and to i officers, on this point is confirmed, namely expel the French from the country. They fur- that when the accused called for Luang ther said they had orders to consult with the] Anurak, the interpreter said something in a accused, if he and his followers were already | language which they did not understand, released, how to expel the French from His i At that time M. Grosgurin took Luang Majesty's territory. The accused, on his I Anurak by the hand and went inside of the part, informed the officers of what had hap- 1 house. The interpreter and an Annamite pened, and they agreed that it was necessary : officer ran up the steps, and, at that moment, to get Luang. Anurak released trom the ousto- 1 Luang Anurak made himself free from M. dy of the French. The accused and about 18 j Grosgurin and jumped down and joined the or 19 followers, of whom two only were arm- ed, and none of whom were in uniform, conducted Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak to the place where Luang Anurak was kept. The accused and the officers then deputed Koon Wang, an official from Outhene, to ask M. Grosgurin for the release of Luang Anurak. The accused, together with the officers and soldiers, were waiting at the distance of about 7 wahs from the place in which Luang Anurak was confined (by the evidence of the accused and the witnesses for the defence). The witnesses for the Prosecution and for the Defence now differ in some particulars, and it becomes necessary to weigh their evidence. Boon Chan in the evidence given before M. Pavie stated that, when the soldiers came, M. Grosgurin was lying ill and unconscious in bed and could not get up. Witness asked the Siamese soldier what thcv came for, and then reported 'io accused. At that time shots were fired inside the house and one Siamese soldier who was in front of the accused was shot. Firing continued, and, after two or three more shots, several Siamese fell down. A consultation then took place between Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak, with the accused, in which it was asked whether it was not a necessity to return the fire as several of their soldiers had fallen. The officers and the accused gave orders to fire in return. The Annamite soldiers, who were drawn up in line in front of the house, and behind the house, fired again, and at that time witness saw the fire breaking out from behind the house. When half of the house was burned down witness saw Boon Chan running from the house and calling to Luang Anurak to saye him. The accused and Luang Anurak — 58 — aid so. Witness further says that the firing then ceased, and that the accused gave the order to 16ok after the body of Koon Wang, and to collect the arms of the dead persons. Witness saw the soldiers col- lect 5 guns belonging to the dead Annamite soldiers and, in examining the dead, it was • found that besides Koon Wang 5 Siamese soldiers had been killed, and that 4 more had been wounded. The accused and witness then went together in a boat, in which they also took Boon Chan and returned to Wieng Krasene. Boon Chan stated that during the fire he had received a shot in the back, which came out in front. Witness further stated that he saw M. Grosgurin holding hi& revolver. He himself shot at the enemy, 5 or 6 shots, with a fowling piece and lie was then again wounded. He saw Grosgmia shot dead through the head, and at that time witness saw several Siamese soldiers coming up the stair case. Witness re- members one Koon Chamnong, who was carrying an axe, cutting open his box and taking therefrom 82 dollars and other goods having a value of 250 dollars, belonging to him, and also stealing boxes belonging4o M. Grosgurin. Witness afterwards saw some Siamese set fire to the house and, when the house was half burnt down, and he could not stand the smoke and heat he ran out of the house. When the soldiers saw this they raised their guns to shoot him but their master forbade them to do so and ordered that he should be arrested. Luang Anurak, who held in one hand a sword, then took the left arm of the witness, whilst the accused took him by the right arm, but it is not clear whether the accused was armed or not, Nguyen Van Blhan, an Annamite soldier,' gives evidence that,when he was wounded, he crawled to a bamboo thicket which was near, and no one did further harm to him. After five days he was found and arrested, and sent to the Commissioner. The evidence of this witness and of the witnesses for the defence agree, inasmuch as witness ' says that the fire commenced whilst the shooting was going on and that, when the house was half burnt down, he saw Boon Chan running from the house and asking for his life. The firing then ceased, but at the time a great deal of the house was already burnt out. No one went up to the house to take the goods ; at the time the fire rage it was impossible to go up stairs on account of the heat and smoke. As soon as Boon uhan came down the firing ceased ; the accused find witness went to their boat, but, at the time the fire was still burning. Thus he did not know how many Annamite soldiers ^vera wounded nor have many had died. When the accused had returned to Wiang Erasene be sent some of his followers to prepare for the burial of M. Grosgurin, and to see after the bodies of the dead, on both sides, and also bury them. On his return he reported that 12 or 13 Annamite soldiers had died, and he took away with him one wounded Annamite soldier and 5 guns belonging to the dead Annamite soldiers. Afterwards some villa- gers brought another sick Annamite soldier. The accused ordered that the wounded man, with the arms, should be taken io the Chief Commissioner. With this act it appears to us, the responsibility of Phra Yot Muang Kwang, which we have to investigate, ceases, and we have come unanimously to the conclusion that we have to give our judgment on the four questions as now set forth : — 1st.— W e have to enquire to what danger M. Grosgurin and his Annamite soldiers, and Phra Yot and his men, were exposed in the affray. We have to enquire whether, and how, the property of M. Grosgurin and his soldiers was lost. 2nd. — We have to enquire whether Phra Yot Muang Kwang, the accused, did, by his own act, kill, or whether he gave orders to kill, M. Grosgurin and the Annamite soldiers. 3rd. — We have to enquire whether the accused maliciously wounded or caused to be wounded Boon Chan, the interpreter, and the Annamite soldiers ; whether the accused took away property and put fire to the house, and thus destroyed the belongings of M. Grosgurin, Boon Chan, and the Annamite soldiers, or whether such acts were done under his orders. We have to enquire whether he did one or more of the acts which are laid to his charge contrary to law. 4th. — If we find that he either committed the crimes laid to his charge, or any one of them, or that he did not commit them, we have then according to equity and law, an d in accordance with the Boyal edict, to pro- - noUnce judgment on the accused. We have consequently carefully examined the indictment* and the evidence, and the ' letters produced by the Prosecution and Defence. We have examined the witnesses who gave evidence before us, we have attentively listened to the speeches de- livered by the learned counsels for the Prosecution and Defence, We have come to the conclusion that both parties were exposed to danger.. With regard to the question of danger to which M. Gros- gurin and his soldiers were exposed ; in the indictment it is said M. Grosgurin and a number of Annamite soldiers, given as be- tween sixteen and twenty-five, were shot dead, and Boon Chan and Nguyen Van Ehan were wounded. According to the in- dictment we have 27 persons who were either shot dead or wounded. The evidence of witnesses on both sides show the follow- ing : — M. Grosgurin and 11 or 12 Annamite soldiers were shot dead, and Boon Chan and 2 Annamite soldiers were wounded, on the 3rd of June, 1893, during an affray which took place at Kieng Chek. On the Siamese • side Koon Wang, who was sent as a mes- senger, and 6 soldiers, died during the af- fray and 4 more were wounded. In the indictment it is said that between 18 or 24 Annamite soldiers were killed; that is 12 more men than can be accounted for after examination. The indictment itself is not certain ° about the '/ember, giving them as between 1$ and 24,. 'and leaving thus a difference of 8' men. M. — 69 — Lnce, who sent the soldien, stated in his report that he sent only 20 men to the place where the aSray took place. This again is a difference of 4 men. We may, therefore, take it for granted that there were only 20 soldiers. The evidence of 2 witnesses for the Prosecution is to the effect that some of the Annamite soldiers, seeing that they were inferio"- In number to the Siamese, ran away. It is not denied that this was possi- ble. Two Annamite soldiers were wounded, we may assume, at the very outset and these according to the witnesses for the prosecu- tion ran away. We may therefore further assume that, in the affray itself no more than 16 Annamite soldiers were killed, and most probably less, as it is not excluded that some Annamite soldiers ran away without bring observed. For it is stated ' that when the affray ceased the Siamese soldiers did not think' of making the Annamite soldiers prisoners? The wounded soldiers had still strength enough to run away, and they were not made priso- ners by the Siamese. We may therefore give credence to the evideace of the accused, that when he sent persons to look after the dead bodies they found the bodies of 11 or 12 Annamite soldiers. With regard to the last part of the ques- tion, having reference to the property lost by M. Grosgurin and the Annamite soldiers we have examined the indictment. Did the accused himself steal, or did he give orders that any one should steal, the arms, ammu- nition, and belongings of .VI. Grosgurin and Boon Chan ? Did he himself put fire or order some person to put fire to the house in which M. Grosgurin and his party were, and could he, therefore, he held responsible that the goods kept in the house were lost. It is not disputed that the accused gave orders to the soldiers to collect the arms of the ten dead Annamite soldiers, and that sent as a messenger, and five Siamese- soldiers were shot dead daring the affray. There was thus a loss of 18 persons on both sides. Boon Chan, two Annamite soldiers, and four Siamese soldiers, were wounded by gunshots, making a total of seven persons. The Siamese soldiers collected the guns of the dead Annamite soldiers and sent them to the Chief Commissioner, and Koon Chan destroyed a topographical map. With re- > gard'to the goods beloogiug to M. Grosgurin and Boon Chan and the Annamite soldiers, and the goods belonging to the accused, which M. Luce undertook to return to him, it can only be stated that perhaps some persons took them away, or that they were consumed by fire. IThe next question that we have to oon- siJer is whether I'hra Yot Muang Kwang, the accused, did, himself, do all the criminal acts laid to his charge in the indictment, knowing the acts were committed by his own order against the law of this country. We have carefully sifted the iadictmsnt and th3 evidence; and have listened to the witnesses of the prosecution and de- fence and to the speecnes of the Counsel ; aftd we have found no evidence whatever that the accused did any of the acts laid to his charge. The qusstions themselves are not put in a definite way, as they make a distinc- tion between the acts doue by himself, or under his responsibility, and his or.leL-.s. The prosecuting Counsel in his closing speech made no difference, and in the opinion of this Court, there is no reason for such question. We, therefore. s:iy the accused did not do any of the acts of himself. With regard to the question whether the acts were done by his orders we are of opinion that this is not a very definite expreisirin. We have examined all witnesses, and va only found in the evidence of Boon Chan, given before M. Pavie, something which may have during the affray a fire broke out in the house "iven rise to the question. VVhen witness in which M. Grosgurin was. There is one [ gave his version about the affray he stated question in dispute, which, however, has nothing to do with the present question — namely, who set the house or fire. We have, at the present time, only to examine who is, responsible for the robbery. It may be ad- mitted that .the Siamese soldiers, on two different occasions, collected the guns belong- ing to Annamite soldiers. With regard to the goods belonging to M. Grosgurin and Boon Chan it is not clear in what they consisted. The fact must not be lost sight of that, among these goods, were also those of the accused, which the French had taken from him for keeping— according to the evi- dence of M. Luce— until they arrived at their destination, when they would be returned. It is thus clear that among the goods burnt was the whole belongings of the accused, hut how many of them belonged to him and how many to the French party cannot be ascer- tained. These goods were either consumed by fire, or- the possibility is not excluded— during the affray, someone took away thu aoods. We must therefore, return the fol- Towino answer to the question— M. Gros- gurin and 11 or 12 Annamite soldiers, K-,epn Wang, a man from Tar Outhene who \^r»s that he saw Phra Tot Muang Kwany, stand- ing behind the soldiers and inciting them. Perhaps this is the reason for the words in ta j indictment "by his orders." It is, however, not our duty to state there is a difference be- and ordering. We need tween incitins not however, enter into that question at all and as Boon Chan, in the sworn evidence given before, has varied his statement. Tha Counsel for the Prosecution reminded witness of the evidence given before M. I'avie, when he stated that he did not heir Phra Yot inciting the soldiers. Witness continued that he was standing too far apart to hear the words of Phra Tot. There are no other witnesses for the prosecu- tion. Stress is, however, laid on the fact that the accused was in a position of authority among the people, and that, there- fore everything done by them must be con sidered as done by his authority. There ma)', under certain circumstances, he some- thing said for this contention, but in the present instance it has no weight, as we shall show hereafter. It is how only our duty to see what the witnesses, have to — 60 say on this poia:. Noue of the wicuesses for the pcosecatioa assert that they saw or heard the accused order any one to act as is set forth in the indictment. Nai Tooi, an officer, stated in evidence that the accused twice gave orders to collest the guns of the dead Annamite soldiers at the place of the affray. The accused himself knew that jivhen two more Siamese soldiers were killed from gunshots fired from the house in which M. Grosgurin was, he held a consultation with Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak as to returning the fire. Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak stats, in their evidence, that when they saw Siamese) soldiers falling down, they consulted with Phra Tot if it was not tims to return the fire of the French. The accaaad agreed thereto, and the two officers then gave orders to their men to fire. Witnesses did not hear Phra Yot also give the order to fire. The evidence of the witnesses appears, in a high degree, trustworthy if we consider that the accused was at that time only consul- ted, and was not in coinmaadof soldiers, and had no authority to act as he admitted hi acted. We may take the evidence of the accused as a boj,st that he would clear the ground, with Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak. R^w- ever that may be the Court 'has not the power to go beyond the sworn evidence of the accused, given in this Court. It is its duty to see what were the results of the orders, and where the responsibility lies. It is true that the accused had a higher position in the permanent service then the two officers; bat his authority extended only to the dis- tricts of Earn Eurt and Eammoun. If the accused had acted like this when he first met M. Luce he would have borne the whole responsibility ; but it was otherwise when the accused allowed the Annamite soldiers to drive him out of the stockade and to escort him to the frontier. Even if he could get away from the authority of M. Grosgurin he could only consider himself under the orders of other people, namely, in this case, of Nai Tooi and Nai Plaak. These, again, were acting under the orders of Luang Vi- chit Sarasate, who was the civil and mili- tary Commissioner at Tar Outhe'ae and Eammoun. He gave orders to the two offi- cers : to act' as it was understood that at that time the accased was still a prisonef of war. The order also took into consider- tion the release of the prisoner, whs it was said they should consult as to how to expel the French from the country. According to this order the ac- cused was only to be consulted, as he knew the people, and the work hai to be done by the two soldiers. The accused could only be considered as a councillor, as the soldiers were under the command of the two officers. The accusad had only about eighteen or nineteen man, of whom only two were armed. Even, therefore, if the accused should have given such orders, the only orders which could be obeyed were the orders given by the officers. There is no evidence given to show that anyone acted onder the orders of the accused. The sol- diers who vrere examined in Court stated that they acted seoordiag to the orders of the officers. Even, however, if the accused had to share the raspousibility with the two officers it can only be said that he acted under the orders of the Chief Commissioner. The accused and the two officers, further, acted according to order in sending Khoon Wang to consult, in a friendly way, as they had not the intention of fighting, if M. Grosgurin had released Luang Anurak. For the affray itself no individual respon- sibility exists. It may be surmised that the Arinamites were under the impression that Phra Yot would offer no resistance, as he had shown no courage in resisting them. He had handed over Kammoun and allowed them to drag him out. They were pursuaded that the Siamese would not resist, as is appirent from the evidence of the Annamite soldiers and lioon Chan. When they heard the accused call Luang Anurak they stil believed that the Siamese would not persist, and thit, if the Annamites only fired one or two shots, and one or two men were wouniad, the Siamese would be frightened and retire. They were also under the impression that as long as they held Luang Anurak in custody the Siamese would not fight. When they saw that Luang .\nurak could free himself they became alarmed and commenced firing in order to frighten the accused and his party, hoping that some one would fall and others run away. They, however, were not aware that the accused was no longer in command. When the officers saw that several Siamese had fallen it- became the duty of the soldiers to resist. They soon saw, however, that whether they offered resistance or not they had to die, and there- fore the fire w ae returned. The Siamese soldiers were more numerous than the opposing party and the result was what might have been expected. The fault does not lie with the accused or his men. We are, therefore, unanimously of opinion that the act of accused, and the two officers was done in strict exe cution of° their duty. Even if the accused should have gi^en the order, together with the officers, he has done nothing that was not his duty. He cannot therefore, he held to be responsible for it. In the closing speech the Counsel for the prosecution stated that the accused had willingly handed over Eammoun to the French in accordance with his letter to M. Luce. It was i mplied in that letter that there would be no quarrel, and during the time the party of the accused was escorted they were going on amicably. When the accused found that he had support he theu thought of attacking M. Grosgurin. The Counsel for the accused disputed this point, stating that the accused did in no way write to that eff3ct. It was a letter of the accused to M. Luce, in which he complained against the French soldiers. The expression "to hand over" did not meet the point. The accused made an attachment of the in- terests and of the responsibility of ad- miaiatering the province, at a time when thfj iBMcused saw no opportunity of acting in/' onordanoe . with ub official duties. 4 — 61 — We are of op'.iva taat the gist of the of the letter of li* vvused to M. Luce is that be made ss I'nohinent accordiD>^ to the castom pre«-i:-iaj in Siam. If any- one, by force of «":rv-jmstances is obliged to hand over KKiia of hia belongings knowing or beiiensj that such handing • over is against li? lior, and if such perron wishes to reserre iis ri^'ht of owners'iip, or has the de*i?f saat such belongings should be returreJ to him, and if such person is afraid U*: tie temporaiy owner will canse such Ix^Ion^iusrs to be estranged, or is not willinsr t-.'' re:uru them to him, he makes an attachi::^i:c of such goods to the temporary owniT. having with him the responsibility uoi to cause any deterio- ration to the good*, and also for the pur- pose of showing thst be has been forced to do so by circumstances, and, further, wishing to show I'aat the person in pos- session of the goods has no legal right to cause any damago to them. This is the custom well established throughout Siam. We are therefore, of opinion that Phra Yot, Muang Kwaug a the French and Anoa- mites ; we are, therefore, unanimously of opinion that a'l the acts arose out of necessity, and were not the outcome of any forethoaght on the part of the accL'sed. With regard to the question whether the accused gave orders tu stpal the mouey and goods belonging to Mr. Grosgnrin, Boon Chan, or the Anuamite soldiers, or whether be gave orders to set the house on fire, we have, after full examination into the facts, cooie to the conclusion that there is not a single witness who charges the accused therewith, nor do we find any reason why the accused should have given such orders. Even if the Siamese should have stolen any goods, or should have set fire to the house, the accused could not be held responsible for such acts, and they cannot, either directly or indirectly, be laid to his charge. The alle- gation that he set fire to the house rests entirely on the assertion of Boon Chan, who said that he saw the Siamese go up to the house, but added that he did not identify them. This witness further states that, not being able to bear the heat, he ran down. The witnesses for the defence deny the statement that anvoue went up to the house. They saw the fire break out at the back of the house, but there is not sufficient proof to say who set it on fire. The Court has only the evidence of Boon Chan, who was the owner of the goods, to go upon. This evidence is not in accord- ance with that given by the seven wit- nesses produced by the Defence ; the only fact vrhich the Court can, therefore, gather from these statements is that a fire broke out during the affray, and that the heat became so intense that it was impossible to go up the staircase. It would be a bold act according to Boon. Chan, for anyone to ascend the staircase, as, at that time, there was firing going on Suppose now, that the victorious party would go up to the house, what reasons would there be for setting the house on Treaty, as Phra Yot had no right" to act fire ? To drive the persons in the house • •■ - ■• Government. The|o"t of »*. ^^ was the case with Boon Chan, who jumped out of the house ? Were the goods kept in the bouse in danger of being burnt ? But uf the goods kept in the house the greater part be- longed to the accused, and if these goods were burned the accused and his party Would lose more thin II. Grosgurin and Boon Clian. Boon Chan himself stated in evidence that before he came with M. Gros"urin he left his goods with the French soldiers stationed at Kbanong Ua. Jt. Luco states tiat he collected the Siamese Governmen: scores, and the goods belonging to the accused, in order to hand — 62 — them over to the accused when he had amved at his destination, and thus make it impossible for anyone to say tliat the French soldiers had stolen anythiut;. If we are to rely on M. Luce's statement, he handed over tlie goods belonging to . the accused and his party to M. Groygurin, to be giveu back by hira to the accused. If such was the case the goods burned belonged to both sides. As t'>ere w -re oeriainly mure goods belonging to tho accused's party it is n-.b likely that, they would have set fire t« the houise, especiaUy when they saw that they ware victurious. Bat Boon Chan alst states that he himself, destroyed atopographical inap,aud the prob- ability is not excluded that this was one of the causes oE the fire, as lie appeared to have been unwilling that anything should fall into the hands of the Siamese. How- ever that may be it does not appear from the evidence of Boon Chan that, even if the followers of the accused took away goods and put fire to the house, the ac- cused himself knew about it, or gave orders for it to be done. The accused gave the orders to collect the arms oE the dead Annamite soldiers, and for this order there e^sted the necessity that he had to send them to the authorities, to show that an armed force of Aunamites had invaded the territory, and that the Siamese had resisted them. The accused did BO according to established custom, and it is not laid to his charge that he, himself, or his followers derived any benefit therefrom. We have, for all these reasons, honestly come to the conclusion that the accused has not committed any of the acts of which he stands accuseil according to the five clauses of the Act of Information. We, therefore, say thut the accused, Phra Yut Muang Ewang, has not committed the crimes which are laid to bis charge by the Advocates for the Crown. The fourth clause states the we " have to enquire whether the accused is guilty of the crimes, whether there are exten- uating circumstances, or whether he is not guilty, and that the Court should con- sult, and mete out to the accused in equity and law, justice according to the Royal edict." We are of opinion that the accus- ed is not guilty of any of the crimes laid to bis charge. Such being the case, and it being pro- vided that our judgment should, as by His Majesty's orders, be communicated to the accused, we, by virtue of Article 25 of the Royal Edict do pronounce the following Judgment, which we sign by virtue of our office, together with the Recorder of the Court. (1) " Is the accused guilty of having committed the crime or crimes whiolj is or arc imputed to him ?" (2) If some aggravating or cxtenna- in,",' circumstance bus bteu plc;.di-il aurainst, or on behalf of the accused. "Has the accused commi'ited the crime under such or such circumstances?*' (3) If some legally allowablo excnse has been pleaded in defence of the accused : (a) Is the fact alleged as an excuse duly proved ? And if proved, {b) Is Such fact a legally allowable excuse ? " If from the answers to the foregoing questions, it appear that the accused is yiiilty of. no crime, the court in pro- [lOiincin^ juigment sbtiH lonclude Ly iiuularing him quit and discharged of the accusation." For these reasons, then, we, acting under the order of His Most Gracious Mrtjesty, do solemnly declare at- our conviction : Phra Yot Muang Kwang is Not Guilty of any of the five charges a^set forth ill the five clauses of the indictment, commencing with tiio charge of wilful murder of M. Giosgurin, com- mitted by himself or by his orders and ending with the charge of arson of the house in which M. Gro^gurin stayed, done by himself or by the orders of the accused. And Luang Satana Yati, Recorder of this Court; is hereby enjoined to see that the accused be released from the custody of this Court from, and at, the time we pronounce this judgment and Luang Ba- tana Yati, Recorder of this Court, is fur- ther enjuineJ to carry out all commands contained in this our judgment, given at the Court of Justice on this 17i;h of March 1894. (Signed,) Krom ItuAsa Bijitpriohakobn Chief Judge.' Seeeabaj Deceo, Judge. Ahpaibonabii, Judge. Tbwat Wososawewaj, Judge. Phta Tauabsabakit, Judge. Phya Tahabsabahet, Judge. BiTTEEBONO, Judge. LvANG Eatana Yati, Recorder. . At the coTislusion Dr. Frankfurter (offi- cial tatei'pre'er)at the requ' st of the Bench inifurmod th>ise in Cour: that the accused was ac^iitted, and the communication was renived with sume slight applause. Correspondence of 1893 between Prince Devawongse, Minister for Foreign Affairs, and M. Pavie, Minister-Resident of the French Republic. (Tratislation.) M. Pavie to Prince Bmawongse. Bangkok, 16th June, 1893. MONSIEUE LE MiNISTEE, I Lave the honour to beg Your Highness to be kind enough to receive me to-day or to-morrow morning or evening at the hour that will be possible to yon. I would desire to have an interview with you on a grave incident that occurred at Kammoun. His Royal Highness,^ Peince Devawongse, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bangkok. Accept, &c., (Sd.) A. Pavie. Frince Bevaioongse to M. Pavie. Foreign Office, June 17th, 1893. MONSIEUK LE MiNISTEE, t have yesterday evening received the letter which you did me the honour of address- ing to me on the same date requesting an interview with me on the grave incident at Kammoun. I shall be glad to receive yon to-day at 5 o'clock in the afternoon. Accept, &c., (Sd.) Devawongse Vaeopbakaen. Minister for Foreign Affairs. Monsienr A. Pavie, Minister Eesident & Consal General for France. — 2 — (Tramslaiion.) M. Fame to Prince Devaioongse. Bangkok, 18th June, 1893. MONSIEUE LE MlNISlSE, Having an urgent comiuunication to make to Your Eoyal Highness on the subject of the snare at Kammoan of which I have spoken to you yesterday I should be greatly obliged to you to kindly receive mo this evening at your usual hour : consequently I shall call at the ministry at 6 o'clock. Accept, &c., (Sd.) A. Pavie. His Boyal Highness Peince Devawongse, Minister for Foreign A£fairs, Bangkok. Prince Devawongse to M. Pavie. Foreign Office, Bangkok, 18th June, 1893. MONSIEUE LE MlNISTEIi:, I have the honour to transmit you here-inclosed the summary which I promised to give you of what I answered io-day to your communication concerning the incident o! Kammoun. Accept, Monsieur le Miuistre, the assurance of my high consideration. (Sd.) Devawongse Vaeopeakaen, Minister for Foreign Affairs. Monsieur A. Pavie, Minister Eesident and Consul General of the French Bepublic. — 3 •E. Note verbale annexed to the letter of Prince Devmoongse, Dated June the ISin, 1893. NOTE VERBALE. Le Prince Devawongse n'a et ne peut matcriellement avoir avantla fin du moisaucun rapport sur ce qui s'est passe. La premiere information luiiut donnee bier par M. Pa vie. II ne peut admettre sans controle Inexactitude de la version donnee 3, M. Lace par trois Annamites fugitifs, ou fondee sur la rumeur populairo dont nous voyons chaque jour a Bangkok les etonnantes inventions. Le caractere honorable bien counu de I'Offioier Siamois Phra Prayot est incompatible avec Tacte atroce qu'on lui attribue ; et il y a des impossibilites matei-ielles a ce que les faits se soient passes comme on les rapporte. Le Prince proteste contre I'expreasion guet-apens en tant qu'elle impliquerait une sorte de complicite du Gouvernement Siamois. Si les Siamois sont forces de se defendre, ils se defendront en observant les regies de I'humanitu et de la civilisation. Le Prince admet que si malheureusement le fbit se confirmait, reparation complete serait due, mais il insiste pour qu'aucane opinion h&tive ne soit form^e. Bangkok le IS juin 1893. (English translation of the foregoing Document.) ' Note Veebal Prince Devawongse has and materially cannot have before the end of the month any report of what has occurred. The first information was given him yesterday by M. Pavie. He is unable to ad- mit without controlling it the accuracy of the version given to M. ;^Luce by three runaway Annamites, or founded on popular rumour whereof we daily see in Bangkok the stupe n- dous inventions- The well-known honourable character of the Siamese ofiicer Phra-Yot is incompatible with the atrocious deed attributed to him, and there are material impossi- bilities that the facts should have occurred as related. The Prince protests against the expression " snare " inasmuch as it would jmply a sort of complicity of the Siamese Government. If the Siamese are compelled to defend themselves, they will do so in complying with the rules of humanity and of civilization. The Prince admits that if, unfortunately, the facts conform with the statement, reparation will be due, but he insists that no hasty opinion should be adopted. Bangkok, June 19th, 1893. Extract from tJte " Gourrier d' Haiphong " of 18th June 1893. Courriev d'Haiphong le I8fch Juin 1893. Le Jaiu II. lo rdsidant Lace a telegrapliie de Gammon : "Le mandarin siamois de Cam-mon apres avoir abandoane co poste sur notre injonc- tion, nous avoir remis ses fusils, efc avoir declare Stre resolu a ne pas rusister et 4 laisser les deux gouvernmeuts reglor la question, avait ete reconduit au Me-kong par V inspecteur Grosgurin, qui avait mission de le protuger contre les habitants. "Arrive ii Kem-kiec, M. Grosgurin etant tombe gravement malade, le mandarin Sia- mois a fait venir secretement d'Hoatene une banJe de 200 Siamois ou Laotious armes, a entoure le 5 jaiu la maison oii U. Grosgurin etait couolie malade, et" I' a assassins lui- meme avec nn revolver "pendant que la bande massacrait I'escorte. "Dis-sept milieiens et un interprete cambodgien ont efce tues, tmis miliciens ont pu s'echapper." En termiuant M. Lace iasiste sur le caractdre odieux de cette trahison. Le Gonvernement a pris aussitot "pour venger oet attentat, des njesures energiques que nous ferons connaitre prochainement. (Translation.) On the 9th of June M. Luce the resident, telegraphed from Cammoun : "The Siamese mandarin of Cammoan after having abandoned this post upon our injunction, after liaving g^ven up to us his rifles and after having declared himself re- solved not to resist and to leave the two Governments to settle the question, was recon- dnctod to the Mekong by Inspector Grosgurin who had the mission to protect him from the inhabitants. " Arrived at Kieng-Chek, M. Grosgurin, being fallen gravely sick, the Siamese mandarin secretly sent for, from Houteue, a band of 200 ariaed Siamese or Liotiana who surround- ed, on the 5th of June, the house where M. Grosgurin was lying ill, and "assassinated him himself with a revolver" wliilst the band massacred the escoirt. " Seveateen militiamen and a Cambodian interpreter were killed, three militiamen were able to escape." In terminating, JI. Luce insists upon the odious character of this treachery. The Government has at once taken energetic measures which we shall soon make known, to avenge this crime. (1) Although this extract is not included in the correspondence, it is given here as summarizing the information, np to the date of 18tb June 1893, i-elating to the aifair of Eieng-Ghek. G. M. Pavie to Pniice Devawongse. Bangkok, 25th June, 189:5. Monsieur le Alinisti-e, Having received from il. de Lanessan new details completing' the report of Resident Lnce, I have the honour to beg your Royal Highness to receive me to-morrow in order that I may commuuicate them. Accept, etc., (Sd.) Pavie. H. R. IT. Primce Devawongse, lliaister for Foreign Affairs, Bangkok. Prince DevauongsB to M. Pavie. 2GTn June, 1893. Monsieur lo ilinistre, I have received your letter of yesterday's date and I shall bo glad to receive yon to-day at 5 o'clock in the afternoon as requested. Accept, etc., ( Sd.) Dkvawonqsk. M. A. Pavie, , &c., &c., &c. I. M. Pavie to Prince Devawongse. Banoeoe, Jolt 1st, 1893. Monsieur le Ministre, I have the honour to beg your Koyal Highness kindly to receive me to-morrow. I have to communicate information which I receive from M. de Lanessan concerning the Cambodian interpreter of M. Grosgarin. Accept, etc., (Sd.) A. Pavie. To H. R. H. Prince Devawongse, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bangkok. — I) — Piince Devawongsc to M. Pavie. (Translation.) FoEEiGN Office, Bangkok, 1.st Jci.y, 189;J. Monsieur le Ministre, I am in receipt of your letter of tliis date, requesting ine to receive you to-morrow, as you have information from M. de Lanessan to couimunicate to me ou tlie subject of M. Grosgurin's Cambodian Interpreter. In reply, I shall be most liappy to receive j^ou to-morrow morning at 9 o'oclock. Accept, Monsieur le Ministre, the assurance of my high consideration. (Sd.) Devawoxgse Vakopeakabk, Minister for Foreign Affairs. M. A. Pavie, Minister Resident and Consul General, of the French Republic. Extract from a letter of Prince Devawongsc to M. Pavie. Foreign Office, July 8tli, 1893. Monsieur le Ministre, I have now received reports about the facts which occurred at Kieilg Chek on Srd June last, and I am happy to state that nothing remains of the accusation which waa made against a Siamese officer of having murdered the French officer, M. Grosgurin, and against Siamese troops of having treacherously massacred a troop of Annamites. The facts as they result from the reports of Prince Prachak,<,the Royal Commissioner at Nong Khai, of Luang Yichit Sarasate, Assistant Commissioner of Laos Puen, of Phra Yot, Commissioner at Kammonn for many years, and from the statement given and signed by the French-Cambodian interpreter named Boon Chan, occurred as follows : — When Phra Yot and bis men had been disarmed and their personal goods (including the elephant of Phra Yot) had been taken away by the superior French-Annamite forces stationed at Kammdun, and when he was compelled to abandon under protest the post under his command, he had, not on his demand but much a<;aiust his will, to make the journey to Kieng Chek in the Custody of a force of Annamite soldiers commanded by the inspector of civil guards, M. Grosgurin. This inspector was instructed to go to Kieug Chek, to take possession of this place and thence to continue to Outhene. When they arrived at Kieng Chek the Annamite forces stopped and irameJiately acted as if occupying a conquered country. M. Grosgurin took Phra Yot's own house, •and Phra Yot had to take shelter at Wicng Srasene. a place on the river Hin Boon at some distance from Kieng Chek. Meanwhile the Siamese officer who was in command at Outhene having been informed of this occupation of Kieng Chek sent a detachment of fifty men to meet the French force. The commanding officer was instructed to demand the withdrawal of the foreign forces from Kieng Chek, but not to use any violence unless compelled to do so. A Siamese officer named Luang Anurak was alone with Phra Yot in the house occupied by the latter at Wieng Krasene when M. Grosgurin came accompanied with nine Annamite soldiers. He at once asked who was the officer in command of the Siamese detachment. Luang Anurak said /lat he was, the man. T''en M. Grosgarin ordered his escort to seize Luang Anurak iipid take him to Kieng Chek to be kept there as a hostage. — 7 — It seems that another Siamese named Nai Ching had also bfen arrested hj the Annamite force, but our reports are not very clear on this point. On the 3rd of June, at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, Phra Yot arrived before Kieng Chek with the Siamese detachment. He sent an officer, Khun Wang, to ask il. Grosgurin to deliver Luang Anurak and to withdraw from the place. M. Grosguiin rejected both these demands. According to the Camb idian interpreter, M. Grosgurin told him that he would do so when he had recovered from his sickness and had arrived at Outhene. This was of course considered as a refusal. But whilst the forces were in presence it happened that Luang Anurak jumped from the house where he was detained, and ran to join his party. When the Annamites saw him doing so, they fired upon him, but missed him and hit one Siamese soldier. Luang Anurak called on his men to protect him. Phra Yot then cautioned the party not to be violent and to do their best for arresting the Annamites alive if possible. But the Annamites continued their fire, and Khun Wang, the same officer who had been deputed to M. Grosgurin, fell dead, so that the Siamese, were compelled to defend themselves by counter-firing. The result was the death of the French officer, M. Grosgurin, killed in action, and of a number of Annamite soldiers which, according to various estimates, was between 17 and 24, as also the capturing of three prisoners, the wounded Cambodian interpreter and two Annamite soldiers, whereof one died from his wounds soon after. There wore also many casualties on the Siamese side, eight killed, whereof one officer, and six wounded, whereof two officers. The greater loss on the Annamite side must be accounted for from the fact that the Siamese appear to have taken a higher position. I think, M. le Ministre, that these clear and full explanations will bo .sufficient to put an end to all outrageous interpretations given to a fact certainly to be deplored, but where the Siamese did nothing more than defend themselves and the territory which they occupied against an unjustifiable act of hostility. The Cambodian interpreter will be released as soon as his wounds will allow him to support the journey and so will also the Annamite soldier. I must, however, ex- pressly reserve the strict right,of the Siaiaese Government to maintain as pi-isonei< auy military person or persons in the act of committing hostility against our territory. Accept, etc. 1M(. (Translation.) M. Pavie to Privce Devawongse. Bangkok, 9th July, 1892. MOMSIEtTB LE MlNISTRJi, I have the honour to beg your Highness to be kind enough to grant me an audience to-morrow morning or to-morrow evening, if possible ; I would like to communicate to you a telegram received from my Government (1) and to confer about the letter which you kindly wrote to me at the date of yesterday, Accept, etc., (Sd.) A. Pavie. (1.) This teleijram referred to the intention of the Frenih Government to send more ships into the Menaiu s — 8 — Foreign Office, 10th July, 1893.. Prince Devawongse to M. Favie. Moosifur le Ministre, I have the honoar to acknowledge receipt of your letter of yesterday's date asking for an interview for to-day in order to communicate to me the contents of a telegram re- ceived from your Gorernmentj and to speak to me on the subject of my letter of the 8th instant. I shall have pleasure in receiving you in accordance with your wish to-day at 5 P. M. Accept, &c., (Sd.) DEVAWONaSB Vaboi'kakab. Minister for Foreign Affairs. M. A. Pavib, llinistcr Resident & Consul Greneral for France. All books are subject to recall after two weeks. Olin/Kroch Library DATE DUE Wrfc 1 ^^^— • ^ ^TJ^^-^ IPM-M iu ^' MAY - 7 2007 GAYLOHD PRINTED IN U.S.A.