“Appeal Court Frees Chinese on Charge of Having Drugs,” Toronto Star. April 15, 1940. Page 01.
----
Lum Ying Not in Toronto When Opium Found in His Home
----
TWO JUDGES DISSENT
----
With Justice Magee and Hodgins dissenting, first divisional court today queshed the conviction registered against Lum Ying by Magistrate Browne on a charge of habing opium in his possession. The accused was sentenced on January 19, 1929, to 18 months’ imprisonment with hard labor, a fine of $300 and a recommendation to deportation for possessing opium.
Chief Justice Mulock, who writes the judgement of the court, points out that the conviction was in respect of opium found in a can under the accused’s bed at a time when he had gone to Niagara Falls to purchase a restaurant.
His Lordship holds that Lum Ying established his part that the drug was in the posseession of others without his consent and also that the section of the act which holds the owner of the house in which the drug is found liable does not apply in this case.
In their dissenting judgements, Justice Magee and Hodgins hold that the onus was on the accused to satisfy the magistrate of the truth of his evidence. Mr. Justice Magee says that two letters found in the house inn question about the price of ‘black goods’ in Vancouver, and their transportation gave rise to suspicions as to the accused’s readiness to deal in unusual goods.’
E. A. Richardson counsel for the department of health stated that in view of the 3-2 division an appeal to the supreme court of Canada would probably be taken.
