4
2
of t
pera
30
stat
rl:
eri
ret
ir
Jer 19, 1858.]
The Hongkong Government Gazette.
"0
to
13
mentioned, I said he was good for $10,000. I never | I had never seen Chun-tai-kwong anywhere before the day I sted to any of Chun-tai-kwong's firm, or to any one con- have mentioned, when I went with the message from Mr i with it, to tender for this Monopoly. I never suggest- Caldwell, and therefore of course not at Dr Bridges's house, so to any one, except a Canton man, whose tender stood nor had I seen him anywhere with Dr Bridges. I was myself on the list, and also I told two Opium-shop-keepers here interested in the grant of the Opium Monopoly; I held one ad come to me to recommend that it should be disposed share out of 8 or 10 in the firm, who tendered under the name ction) that they had better tender, as it had been decided of "Tai-foong." Since I went to Macao about a month ago, the business by tender. I never told any one of Chun- no communication whatever has taken place between Dr ong's firm, or any one connected with it, that they were Bridges and myself. Dr Bridges's coolic called upon me of getting the Monopoly. I never told any one that any to-day, and told me Dr Bridges wished me to come up here. was sure to get it. I told Chun-tai-kwong's partner, the I have only seen Dr Bridges once since I went to Macao; dealer, that he had got it, after I had been informed that was when I returned for Macao; it was about 14 days by Dr Bridges. I did go with Chun-tai-kwong to the ago. Dr Bridges then said to me, "I have changed my house, He said I had been away too teme Court, some time after he had obtained the Monopoly, I don't want you any more.'
this name struck off the list of interpreters. I did so long, and discharged me. Dr Bridges has not spoken to me request, as he did not know how to set about it. On at all except as above, since I left for Macao. 24th April, I was in the Acting Colonial Secretary's room, YEONG-A-CHEW.-Examined.
Acting Colonial Secretary and the Surveyor General By the Chairman.-I am surety for Chun-tai-kwong in the
there.
A letter was brought to the Acting Colonial bond connected with the Opium Monopoly I told Chun- etary, which I afterwards learned was from the Attorney | tai-kwong that the License was be granted to his "eral." Dr Bridges requested me to send for Chun-tai-kwong, firm. I knew this because Mr Caldwell sent for me, and Mr D'Almada was directed to procure Hoey's attendance. asked me whether I was security for the Chuen-lee, and -tai-kwong came in when Dr Bridges, the Surveyor General then told me the Chuen-lee had obtained the License. I myself were there. The Treasurer came in directly after have known A-hoong for ten years, and Chun-tai-kwong for an-tai-kwong, I am almost certain that before the Treasurer four years. Chun-tai-kwong and A-hoong can only have e in nothing was said by Chun-tai-kwong. I may now say become acquainted lately, because I know that A-hoong came im certain, and for this reason, that Dr Bridges said to the to me after Chun-tai-kwong had got the License, and said he eyor General and Treasurer, that as they were next in wished I would introduce him to Chun-tai-kwong, as he al rank to himself, he wished them to hear what Chun-tai-wished to have a share in the License, to put in a Four **ng would say in reference to some statements contained Hundred Dollars. I told him that if he went to the Opium the Attorney General's letter. He denied everything in Farm Office he would find Chun-tai-kwong. I do not re- rd to the statement about the $400 having been paid here collect that Chun-tai-kwong and A-chew were ever in my #Be Government Offices, and as a cumshaw, to Dr Bridges, shop together, and that I told one who the other was.
pt that he said he had paid $400 to Dr Bridges at his By Mr Dent.-When I signed the second bond as surety, retaining fee, and he said that, and that only, was Chun-tai-kwong was with me, and it was at Dr Bridges's House. told Hoey. He denied having mentioned anything the $1,000. He laughed at the statement about Dr ges being a clever man, and tearing up laws, and making Governor do what he liked. He denied having said this; I do recollect that when Mr Hoey came, and made some en to this statement, that Chun-tai-kwong said something reply. I don't recollect whether he said, "Well, there's no at harm in that surely." Mr Hoey afterwards came in, and * was so excited that I cannot tell what he said. He however ed having told the Attorney General that Chun-tai-kwong aid he had paid $400 to Dr Bridges as a "cumshaw," use he said that when he paid $250 to the Attorney General ris retaining fee, he had remarked that it was reasonable, because he knew that Chun-tai-kwong had paid Dr Bridges 10 as a retaining fee. I think he said that he had told the Amer General about Dr Bridges being a clever man, and so and then Chun-tai-kwong made the remark which I have led to before. He was very indignant that what he consider- be had stated to Mr Anstey in confidence, as his Counsel, d be made use of in this way. He was asked whether be had the draft of a letter which he said had been drafted by the Attorney General. He said he had, and pulled out me papers from his pocket, but I did not see what they were. Mr Hoey was asked whether he would write down t he had said. He commenced writing, but I know wing as to what he wrote. I never suggested to any of the sea-lee firm, or any one else whatever, to give Dr Bridges a raining fee in this matter. The first time I ever heard about its on the occasion of the receipt of the Attorney General's ter above mentioned. Whatever I have mentioned that I
"
bere done in this matter I did as Protector of Chinese ; I am nually in the habit of doing such things-every day. now A-hoong, Dr Bridges's Comprador. I recollect Dr ges directed me to make inquiries as to whether he hoong) had any interest in any of the tenders. I recollect, that my attention is called to it, and that the list of recs is handed to me, that it was thought that A-hoong esht have an interest in the Tai-foong firm. I reported Map A-foong: had an interest in it. I think Dr Bridges did me that he supposed A-hoong to have a share in this shop, th he heard was a small rice-shop. OW-A-HOONG.-Called in and examined.
by the Chairman.—I have been Dr Bridges's Comprador everal years, until about a week or two ago. I know Chun- wong by sight; he did ask me what he was to pay Dr ces; I told him $300 or $400—this was when I met him in dead I had seen Chur-tai-kwong once before, when I came takin to Government Offices, when the bond was to be signed, was sent for by Mr Caldwell, to tell Chun-tai-kwong up his security. I had seen A-chew two days before Chun-tai-kwong did not come in on that occasion; if Likwong says I saw him then, he must be mistaken.
|
|
DR BRIDGES.-Recalled, and examined. By the Chairman.-I cannot tell what day exactly Chun- It was I know tai-kwong first spoke about the retainer to me. after the 17th March. The retainer-$400-was paid in my dining-room on the day of the fire. I think on the day on which the second bond was signed here. I am certain I shewed the tenders to Mr Lyall, to yourself, I believe, and generally and openly. The tender list was passed round the Council table on the 17th March,-tile day on which the Opium Or- dinance was passed. I deny entirely that there was any refer ence whatever to "cumshaw," as connected with the $400 retaining fee; there could not be. I disbelieve that Mr Hoey ever could have said so, and I disbelieve it, because Mr Hoey when he was questioned by me, said what Mr Caldwell has already stated, namely, that the conversation with the Attorney General was the comparative price of retainers. Mr Hoey had been previously very angry and excited in his way of talk, but when he said this he spoke more composedly, and gave a reason for his statement.
In answer to Mr Dent.--The only person connected with Chun-tai-kwong's firm I had ever known before, was the surety A-chew.
t
Chairman.--What was it that Mr Hoey wrote in your room on this occasion ?
Witness.-The which Mr Caldwell mentions that Mr
paper
Hoey wrote in my room, I now produce (paper O.) On the occasion of his being questioned at my office about the state- ments in the Attorney General's letter, he was asked about the draft letter of the Attorney General; he said he thought he had it, and pulled a number of papers out of his pocket. I believe he did not succeed in finding it.
I
In answer to Mr Dent,—I want it distinctly to be understood, that I did not name any sum to Chun-tai-kwong as my fee; told him that if what he offered was enough, I would accept it, otherwise I would not. The fee I do not consider a high for a year. I thought this plan better than charging a separate one; it was not simply a retaining fee, it was a consulting fee fee for every time Chun-tai-kwong might come and consult
me;
it was a less fee than I mentioned to Dent & Co. last
year for somewhat similar business. I have spoken to Mr Day on the subject, and he told me that he considered the fee much too small a one. In the list of tenders before referred to, and submitted to the Governor, you will see that I had noted that the three tenders highest on the list had not been received till after date. I want also that the committee should observe, that the tender from the firm in which I thought my comprador was interested, stands next in rank, and I could not therefore have recommended it to have been accepted. I would further add that when Sir John Bowring requested me to undertake the Acting Colonial Secretaryship, we came to a distinct understanding, that my hours were to be my own, and that my professional practice was not in any way to be inter-