FJE
365
(78)
with Ma-chow Wong. When the prisoners were taken ashore—two women and three or four children remained on board. I had orders that if they wanted to go on shore, and buy anything I was to send a Chinese constable with them. One day when I went to market, I saw the woman at Ma-chow Wong's house, and asked her what she was doing there; she said she was there to buy something. I told her to come along with me and took her on board again. When the case was brought on before the Magistrate and remanded, all the witnesses left the place. The complainant came to me before they went away, and stated he believed they were going to be bribed. I went and told Mr May of it, and asked him to give me his idea about it. As Mr May did not give me any orders to prevent them going away, I was not able to do so.
I remember the two boats being seized in January 1857; one of the boats after delivery removed to opposite the Central Market, where, in passing, I saw Ma-chow Wong on board. I recollect seizing the boat off Kwong Yik Loong, and I know that that boat was in my custody shortly before the crew being charged with piracy and murder. Mr May asked me if I could get any evidence that the men were being bribed. I have seen Ma-chow Wong after the case I have before mentioned in communication with persons to whom boats had been delivered over in cases of piracy which had broken down.
Adjourned till to-morrow at 12 o'clock.
TWENTIETH DAY,
Friday, 9th July, 1858, at 12 o'clock Noon.
Present,-All the Members, except the Hon. Mr Davies.
NORMAN RAMSAY MASSON, Acting Registrar to the Supreme Court,-Recalled.
I was present in Court when Eli Boggs was tried. I have heard of a paper which was said to have been produced by Boggs, but I do not recollect seeing any paper in Boggs' hand, neither do I recollect hearing him read from one. No paper was put into my hands from Boggs and read by me. I do not remember any paper being handed to the Jury. There is no paper amongst the records of the Supreme Court read by Boggs on his trial, and it is my opinion that no paper was read by him in court.
WILLIAM HENRY MITCHELL, Assistant Magistrate, Recalled at his own request to make an additional statement.
I stated in my last examination that I did not recollect any seizure of tin having been made in the case in question, nor did I, until afterwards meeting Mr Caldwell, when he brought to my recollection faintly, that there had been a seizure and a subsequent investigation before the Magistrate. I caused a very strict search to be made in the records of our department for any case bearing upon the matter, and at last one was found dated 29th and 30th of June 1855. The case came before Mr Hillier, which was one sufficient reason why I might not have known anything at all about it. I observe in looking over the case that the warrant for the seizure of certain tin was granted by me on the 20th June, was put into execution by Mr Caldwell on the 23rd, and the case did not come before the Magistrate until the 29th and 30th following; so that, beyond the mere granting of the warrant, I had nothing more to do with it.
Cross-examined, I knew Tong Achik the brother of Tong Aku the late Interpreter. He was also himself an Interpreter at the Police Court. I remember his dismissal from the Government employ. His dismissal was on the grounds that certain documents were found in the case of a piratical vessel brought in by H.M. steamer Cruizer. From the documents it appeared that Tong Achik was mixed up in a very improper manner with those pirates. There was a particular letter found amongst those papers in which Tong Achik was thanked by his "brethren of the seas," as they figuratively styled themselves, for having by means of false interpretation I think got off from punishment certain persons charged with piracy, I think at the November or December Sessions preceding. I recollect on one occasion myself authorising Mr Lay to go with Mr Caldwell, I think to the Kowloong mandarin, respecting some case, but forget whether it was with reference to Achik. I don't recollect receiving any information in this case from Ma-chow Wong in Mr Caldwell's house upon which I acted.
Re-examined. The warrant which I issued in the tin case was dated the 20th, and only executed on the 23rd. I do not know what occasioned the delay. I have read the depositions in the case. If I had had to deal with that case, and if I had hesitated to commit it to the Supreme Court, I should have sentenced the men to three months' imprisonment for having unlawful possession of the tin. I should have done so on the following grounds: -Seventy-one blocks of tin are seized by Mr Caldwell in the hong of one of the richest brokers in the Lower Bazaar; the property is proved to have been stolen property; when called upon to account for his possession of it, he states that he got it on sale by commission from a bumboatman, whom he is unable to produce. As a bumboatman is a pauper trader of the lowest class, I should have concluded at once that the broker could not have received $700 worth of property from such a man without his having good reason to suppose that it was dishonestly come by.
I am not certain that no Chinese papers or translations were produced to me by Mr Caldwell or any one else at the examination into Beaver's case; I have no recollection, whether Mr May commenced the investigations in Beaver's case. I have recently read the depositions, and observe some reference in the early stage of the proceedings to some documents which were to be produced by Mr Caldwell.
WILLIAM TARRANT, Proprietor and Editor of the Friend of China,--Called and examined.
I have never to the best of my recollection made any statement in writing to the Attorney General, about any such connection, nor handed to him any statement in writing made by any other person.
I may have written letters to individuals in which Mr Caldwell, Eli Boggs, and the Eaglet's name were mentioned. I used to take a great deal of interest in the movements of the rebel squadron which was here, with a view to finding out what their objects, and who their leaders, were. In the course of those inquiries I became acquainted with Eli Boggs. On one occasion Boggs said to me that the Eaglet was playing the very deuce with the rebels altogether, and that the Eaglet took every opportunity of capturing their boats wherever she found them. He mentioned a great atrocity which had been committed on the coast, in which a great many men had been killed by the Eaglet's guns, and of which little was known here. I asked him to get me what proof of it he could, and if he got me good clear proof of the matter I would expose it. He told me that he would employ a person to go on board the Eaglet to watch and let me know what went on. Not long after that he told me about some guns that had been piratically obtained by Ma-chow Wong, and Boggs affected to be very bitter against Ma-chow Wong. Not long after that I happened to be in the market close by Ma-chow Wong's house, and saw Boggs go in. I followed him into the house, and found him in a very jovial conversation with Ma-chow Wong. It appeared to me that he was playing a double part, and I never spoke to him afterwards, and he has never had the audacity to call upon me since.
This was about the end of 1856.
I remember the gold dust robbery. I do not know that the prisoners brought up were in any way connected with Ma-chow Wong. I have been interpreter at the Police Court, I think, about four years. During this time I have seen a great number of cases in which persons have been charged with piracy. I don't recollect seeing Ma-chow Wong himself in the Court, but have seen his friends who were interested in the cases come up. I know some men who were generally employed by him as messengers. If there was any case in which a lawyer was engaged, and if the lawyer was not in time, these men went for him. This was in cases where men were charged with piracy. I remember also these persons offering themselves as bail for persons charged with piracy. Mr Stace was the lawyer I know. Po-Pak-Shing was a notorious pirate.
I was in the Police Court when a Chinese petition was brought by some men, who stated that they were the real emigrants, regarding the return of the gold dust. Mr May was sitting Magistrate, and I was interpreter. I interpreted the petition to Mr May, but do not now recollect its contents. I heard the man saying that he was authorized to come and receive the gold dust. I think Mr May sent him to Mr Caldwell, and also asked him about the letter authorising him to come. He went to Mr Caldwell, and I have no recollection whether he came back or not. I don't recollect whether Mr May gave him a note to take to Mr Caldwell. The gold dust was given over by Mr Caldwell.
I first came to China in 1835, and have resided here since 1840. I knew Mr Caldwell by repute as far back as 1836, and saw him at Whampoa in 1838. I first became acquainted with him in 1841, when he commanded the brig Thistle, owned by Akwei. When I first knew Mr Caldwell by repute, he held a situation with Mr Innes as Clerk. What I heard about Mr Caldwell was mere hearsay, and I hardly know how far I am justified in speaking of it. I may say this, that on one occasion I asked Mr Caldwell regarding the reports going about him, and he told me that Messrs Jardine, Matheson & Co., had investigated the matter for him, and had certified to Mr Innes that the report to which I alluded was erroneously based. I think Mr Caldwell said Messrs Jardine, Matheson & Co., or some member of the firm, had given him a letter to that effect. The report was, I believe, that he had not accounted for the proceeds of some Opium which had been entrusted to him for sale. I know the report threw Mr Caldwell under a cloud entirely with the community in China. I know nothing further than this, and that as a Shipmaster he was as much respected as the generality of that class. I heard this report from a great many. Markwick, the late Government Auctioner, was the first who told me of it. This was in 1840. Mr Caldwell's character since then is as well known to the public as to me.
Of my own knowledge I know nothing beyond the reports about his being mixed up with Ma-chow Wong.
'NG MUN-SOW, Interpreter at the Police Court,-Recalled.
I remember two boats being seized off the central part of the town, and Po-Pak-Shing being seized on a charge of piracy connected with them. After several remands the witnesses for the prosecution were not forthcoming, because I was there when they came but do not recollect having any conversation with them. I heard that they were willing to give about $850 if the men should be released. I did not hear this from them, but from men in the town. What I heard was that they were willing to expend this money in getting his release. I did not hear in what way—nor whether it was to be given to any person. I was not the interpreter in the case, and the men did not speak to me, as they would have done had I been.
I think it was Lun Loong and Sei Hing who bailed Po-Pak-Shing, and the other prisoners. These two were shops with which Ma-chow Wong had something to do. I think there was no doubt that Ma-chow Wong knew of Po-Pak-shing being a notorious pirate. I have heard that Mo-Mee-Ma, also is a very notorious pirate. Shan-tung Wei and Tai-fai Woot were notorious pirates, and were once charged with piracy before the Magistrate. In both cases I think the prosecutor was absent. It is difficult for me to state from my own knowledge what connection there was between these pirates and Ma-chow Wong.
I know that Shan-tung Wei said to one of his relations who is residing in the town, that he gave $500 to Ma-chow Wong, and yet he said he could not get back his boat. I know the case of a man being apprehended for stealing a watch from Mr Lapraik. The arrest was by ...
(79)