البال الان ختم متر مطار
34
Restrictions imposed by Shanghai on vessels arriving from Hongkong. For the same reasons as were advanced in my letter of the 1st instant in reference to the Quarantine Restrictions imposed by Singapore on this Colony, my Committee consider that no adequate reason exists for the action of the Port Authorities of Shanghai.
My Committee, in respectfully calling the attention of His Excellency the Governor to this hardship, feel assured that prompt action would result in the removal of the Restrictions which are unnecessarily hampering the Shipping of the Port, and would therefore beg that His Excellency the Governor will be good enough to communicate with His Brittanic Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghai on this subject. I have, &c.,
E. A. M. WILLIAMS,
Secretary.
Hon. Mr. A. M. Thomson,
Colonial Secretary.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
THE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST A SOLICITOR,
THE FINDING OF THE COURT,
MR. DIXON SUSPENDED FOR THREE YEARS.
The lengthy proceedings before the Chief Justice and the Puisne Judge in connection with the application of Messrs. Hastings and Hastings to have Mr. . F. Dixon struck off the roll of solicitors practising in this colony for nn- professional conduct were concluded on July 5 when both Judges delivered judgment.
The Chief Justice said-Messrs. Hastings and Hastings, solicitors practising in this court, bring to the notice of the court certain alleged nets committed by their managing clerk, Mr. Clive Fletcher ixon, also a solicitor admitted to practice in this court, which it is suggested necessitate the exercise of disciplinary measures by this court The nature of these charges
C. CLEMENTI,
was for Colonial Secretary,
The Secretary,
Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce.
DISCHARGED AND RE-ARRESTED.
On the 29th ultimo a native appeared before Mr. J. R. Wood on the charge of being in unlawful possession of a fox trap. Constable Taylor, when patrolling a road at Kennedy. town, observed the man carrying the trap. The; native noticed the policeman at the same time, dropped the trap, and walked on. arrested, and placed before the Court on the charge stated, but his Worship discharged the
defendant.
He was
colony come
[July 10, 1909.
things that he has done. He has been de fended with zeal and devotion by his professional advisers, and if the finding of this court could have been staved off by advocacy and handling of his case it would have been achieved most legitimately. I have now to make one further general remark as to the nature of these pro- ceedings, because my finding depends in great measure upon it. The motion was made by Messrs. Hastings because there is no repre- sentative body of solicitors incorporated as
29
important questions of
some
the Incorporated Law Society in Eng- land, who could assume the duty of put- ting the matter before us officially and the proeedings inevitably took the ultimate form of an issue between Messrs. Hastings and Mr. Dixon. But the dispute between them covers a wide area, involves many subordinate issues, none of which is before us. Even the issue which is apparently before the court-whether Messrs Hastings have proved the charge or whether Mr. Dixon has disproved the charge is not before us precisely in this form because, shall presently point out,
onus would seem The following reply was received from the will appear from the judgment. The one which I have to mention is the alleged embezzling of Government :-
Colonial Secretary's Office,
sums paid by clients to Mr. Dixou on behalf of to be involved, and were in fact urged, which The sole the firm for services rendered by him as manag- I do not think are really raised. 8th July, 1909.
question is whether the case of reprehensible SIR-I am directed to acknowledge receipt ing clerk of the firm. The first point which we of your letters of 1st and 3rd instant on the had to consider was whether this allegation, conduct brought before the court is satisfactorily and without doubt proved. I now come to the subject of the imposition of quarantine restric-¡uvolving as it did a criminal charge, should not tions at Shanghai and Singapore on arrivals have been tried before a criminal court. Mr. specific charges. The Goulab charge was at our from Hongkong, and to state that telegraphic Dixon, by his counsel, strongly contended that suggestion properly withdrawn. It was at best the proper procedure and said one man's word against another, and I must representations have been made to the authori. this was ties at both ports in the sense desired in your
that he was willing and desirous of stand- confess I should not have liked such a charge With the evidence available. ing
Messrs his trial.
Hastings declined pressed ou letters. I am, &c..
to prosecute and maintained that this court regard to the Wan Hi charge, I am bound bound to entertain their application to criticise, subject to what I have already
of quite irrespective
the fact that said, the action taken in connection with
My own
this man. was involved,
In the first place I do not approve criminal charge opinion very strongly leaned towards the trial of the police being made use of in private of the question before the assizes, but after matters. The police are public officers and hearing the very able arguments of counsel on should not be used, nor should they lend them- both sides we came to the conclusion that the selves to being used as private detectives if only for this reason that it must weaken their disciplinary jurisdiction of the court exists altogether independently of there being con- authority and efficacy in the discharge of their 1 f course, there was in this case current jurisdiction in the criminal courts-public duties.
be exercised in the face of an a criminal charge involved, but I have been that it may acquittal and that it might even be declined in ¦ informed throughout these proceedings that The point really Messrs. Hastings always declined to prosecute. the face of a conviction
eren if the police had contemplat- involved is, I think, the claim to have a charge And
case up the
with regard to of this sort tried before a jury. As to this Ied taking
no doubt that the proceedings for Wan Hi, looking on him as a witness was not live striking a solicitor off the roll must in this regular. I also object altogether to the police before the court; neither the surveillance to which the man was subjected, old English procedure by way of inquiry and I am not surprised that he complained. before the Masters nor the new English proce. Secondly, a statement was taken from this wit dure of enquiry before a committee of the uess on oath before Mr. Wilkinson acting in his Incorporated Law Society reported in either capacity as notary public in the presence of case to the court would be possible. he motion Inspector Hanson. I think this was irregular, comes before the court as normally constituted; but we were told that it is a practice which has and therefore if the court should think fit either long prevailed in the Colony for notaries to such statements on oath. Obviously, on account of the complexity of the question take
what wus done in this case involved or of the doubt which the facts raised therefore
was perfectly bona fide. Our procedure to call to its aid a jury, it would be within its power in doing so. The question is of great does not recognise any mode for manufacturing moment to both parties-of the gravest evidence-I use the word in no offensive sense-- moment to Mr. Dixon. I thought it except in a special procedure for perpetuating right therefore to ask my learned brother testimony or binding people down to statements to sit with me so that the hearing of the motion other than is provided by the Statutory Declara- has been before the Full Court. We intimated, tions Act, introduced into this colony by however, that if we should in the end find a jury: Ordinance 8 of 1893, and this did not profess to necessary we should cause one to be empanelled. he a statutory declaration. A notary's powers Jack Shepherd" of Hongkong has not We have not found it necessary, for the question in connection with the administration of oaths
of irrespective
the
of his duties yet been recaptured, but a little more light has in issue has proved to be simpler than at oue
are these: been thrown on the story of his escape.
He may take statutory We time seemed likely. I desire in the first place office understand that he succeeded in scaling the jail to make two remarks of a general nature. The declarations, but these declarations must be wall with the aid of his blanket, which he tore action which Messrs. Hastings took was al-made voluntarily; the declarant must go to the into strips to make a rope. He left his coat together unavoidable, was forced upon them by It is behind, departing from the prison in a pair of the nature of the information received. jail trousers. Once outside the wall, it
difficult to put oneself in the position of a firm of that
solicitors in extensive practice suddenly inform. ed that their managing clerk, in whom implicit trust has been placed, who has been entrusted with the conduct of heavy and important cases, who has apparently conducted them with great success and to the great satisfaction of the clients, has been guilty of appropriating mouey paid by the clients to him on account of the firm. I shall be compelled to criticise what they in fact did in
two in stances, but this criticism must be tempered by the recognition of the very difficult and most painful position in which they were placed. So too Mr. Dixon (if he is innocent of the charges brought against him as he alleges he is) was placed in a most distressing and painful position, and I would willingly if it were possible find in this fact some palliation for some.
On Sunday the same man was arrested for trespassing in the Tung Wal: Infectious Disease Hospital, and the police discovered that the defendant had stolen the fox trap from this institution. The prisoner was charged with being a rogue and vagabond; with being inside the mortuary with intent to commit a felony, and with stealing the fox trap. Mr. J. R. Wood found the prisoner guilty and sentenced him to six weeks' imprisonment on the first charge,
three months on the second: and three months and four hours' stocks on the third, the sentences to be consecutive.
The
THE ESCAPED PRISONER.
appears
he immediately made for the higher levels, where he decided to steal some clothing. The first that offered was some ladies' underwear, which he appropriated and proceeded on his way, secreting his jail trousers in the bush near Robinson Road. In the western district he attempted to steal a suit of clothing, but was arrested by an Indian constable. The con stable, however, was induced to hand his prisoner over to another Chinese, being persuaded that this man was a lukong. It now appears that he was a friend of the prisoner, for the latter has again escaped, and being such a slippery customer, it is doubtful if he will give the police another opportunity of arresting him. There were thirteen previous convictions against the man, six of which were for returning from banishement.
one or
and
here
notary and ask him to take his declaration. And it must be in the form prescribed by the Act, which this was rot. Secondly, under order 38, rule 6, examinations, affidavits, declarations and other matters may be sworn before a notary in
matters pending before the High Court. was at the time this man's statement was made The fact no matter pending before this Court. that the statement was not intended to be used is immaterial. The objections to such a pro- ceeding as was adopted in this case are clear. The man who had made such a statement knows he has made it and must in giving his evidence be conscious of it, and that he might be non- fronted with it; yet it is a statement on oath to which the penalty for perjury does not attach. It is therefore for the purposes of the Court valueless and can only avail the person who has But the law, as I have said, doos so obtained it. not sanction such a proceeding. Oaths can only beadministered under the sanction of the law.
Page 10Page 11