incidental to the Office independent of Inquests, else the terms proposed in your letter of the 27th Ultimo would not have been stated at so low a rate. Since the Supreme Court has been established, the Coroner has extra duties to perform—the ecclesiastical jurisdiction involving great responsibility, on neglect of which he is liable to be punished (vide Regula generalis, see: GR1178/1922/32(III) dated 11th November 1844) and no fees are therein allowed him for his trouble. It has not been taken into consideration that a Coroner is continually called upon by notice from the Magistrates and also private persons to inspect dead bodies of Chinese found under suspicious circumstances. Attendances of this kind have been of very frequent occurrence and expense incurred in the shape of boat hire for which no allowance is made. Besides all this, it has happened in two or three instances that poor Europeans on whom Inquests have been held have left no means to defray the expense of their burial, and this expense has fallen on me who am bound, as a Coroner, to see that their bodies are interred.
To enumerate all the circumstances relating to the office would be very tedious; but I would wish to remark that to hold a proper official Inquest, and make a return, occupies at least a day and a half or two days independent of stationery where everything is not excessive. The fee of five dollars is not equivalent to the value of time, labour, and expense bestowed. (A Guinea is equivalent to the value of felony for each inquest.)
I have thus far endeavoured to throw light on the subject; but the Honorable the Chief Magistrate, through whom Inquests were returned to the Government, is well aware...