201
(103)
Cross examined by MR TARRANT,
from 4 to 6 hours in the examination of the documents. 10 or 11 hours.
I learnt from Mr Jarman that there were 3 separate sets of books,-I cannot give the precise dates of my examination of the books. It was after the commitment and before the Trial. There was nothing reported to me as appearing either in the books or other documents. I have now perused Mr May's evidence, as given before the Caldwell Commission.
I never had a good opinion of Ma-chow Wong. After examining the books, my opinion was in no way affected for better or worse.
No entry or document that I perused relating to gambling houses led me to infer that Ma-chow Wong was connected with pirates or was not with them. There was nothing in the documents or books to implicate Mr Caldwell or Dr Bridges, or any other British official, in any way with pirates or outlaws, by nick name or otherwise. The only name mentioned was Mr Caldwell, as the buyer of one picul of Rice.
As to No. 9, I recollect one small mottled cover book in which there was only one entry, which was in Mr Caldwell's handwriting, an entry of wages paid to an European Master of a Lorcha. That book was part of the documents seized as Ma-chow Wong's. Items No. 10 to 12 were not reported to me by my examiner.
No. 13 was reported to me as being the entry of payments to myself. Nos. 14 to 16 inclusive were not reported to me. No. 17 measure 9 inches by 10. I knew that Ma-chow Wong was in custody on a charge of purchasing goods unlawfully obtained, when I was sent to examine his books.
The quantity of books which I examined at the Police Station would measure about 3 cubic feet. The books were not consecutive; one was 10 years back, one was 5. I understand the books to be Ma-chow Wong's. I saw his name several times in some of the books.
(Signed)
By Mr Tarrant. Dr Legge asked me to examine the books for Mr Stace. I examined them at the Supreme Court.
HO-SHUN-SHEN,—I am an Assistant of Dr Legge, and a preacher of the London Missionary Society. I examined certain Chinese books and other papers stated to have belonged to Ma-chow Wong in August or September last year.
Some were books of the Quang-yek-loong shop (Mah-chow Wong's) others appeared to be the books of other parties, whether Mah-chow Wong's or not I cannot say.
With reference to No. 7, I recollect one entry referring to Mr Caldwell, in which he was recorded as the purchaser of a picul of rice. That was the only instance in which his name was mentioned under any denomination whatsoever,
(Signed)
HO-SHUN-SHEN.
Court adjourned from 1 to 2 P.M.
Examination of HO-CHUN-SHEN,-resumed,
By JAMES MONGAN,-examined on oath. [The evidence of this witness as given before the Caldwell Inquiry Commission on 23th June 1858 is here read over to him, with an intimation that he should correct, the instant, any statement which might have been his reported, and further that he was to give any fresh evidence of which he might be in his possession not heretofore given.]
I have no recollection of item No. 8. I write and speak the English language, and did not see No. 9, or any document from which it was derived.
Item No. 10. I have some recollection of an official letter, from, I think, the Cowloong Mandarin, but do not recollect its contents,
Item No. 11, I have no recollection of this. Item No. 12, the same.
Witness states. With exception of a slight discrepancy the date of 29th September, which should have been the 30th, I now confirm the evidence read over to me.
I found nothing in the documents to involve any complicity on the part of Mr. Caldwell or Dr Bridges or any other British Officer in unlawful transactions.
By Mr Tarrant. The books would measure about 12 cubic feet, and were an actual incumbrance in our office. When I sent the packages to Mr Wade I did not stamp the sealing wax, I merely put it over the joinings of the tape.
SIR,
APPENDIX.
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE,
Monday, 24th May, 1858.
After office hours on Saturday, the 22nd instant, I had the honour of receiving yours of that date, covering "a copy of the charges to be forwarded to the Committee appointed for investigating the accusations brought by me against the Registrar General,"
Had it reached at an earlier period, you should have had my reply to it the same day.
I have the honour to remind H. E. of my appeal to the Secretary of State, and of his own repeated absolutions of Mr Caldwell, against which I have presented that appeal.
I do this the rather, because I perceive that, at least two of the "charges" or "accusations" which are contained in H. E's "list"-I mean Nos. 15 and 16-were stated to Lord Stanley, and to none else, in my letter of the 17th instant, and go where else, and merely by way of support to the charge which I did make and prove, but which H. E. overruled, that of being concerned in the brothel, No. 48, or the management thereof.
all important documents and affects of the convict, then at the Police Station; also his previous conduct at the Police Court, nolle prosequi on the stronger charge; and a number of other matters, not specified in the letter of the 13th instant, which H E.'s decision of the 10th instant, in Legislative Council, compelled me to send in.
I. To what it omits-Because it does not contain the least reference to some of the stronger facts: e. g., the "accusations". (for H. E. holds these and "informations" to be synonymous) brought by Mr Cleverly and Mr Forth, on the authority of the Land Office and Treasury books, and by Mr Gilmour, the Treasury Clerk, on his own authority, corroborated at the last moment by the confession of Mr Caldwell; and importing against the latter, not only the guilt charged in No. 17 of the "List." and others of its "charges," but also that of a twice repeated falsehood told in defence, and to which I presume the 14th "charge," in its extraordinary vagueness, relates; and also the conduct of Mr Caldwell, in his character of "friend" of the pirate, after his conviction, in applying for and obtaining the
1. Of the first are "charges" 2, 5, 14, 15, and 17; 3, 4, 6, and 16; and 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 12,
2 Of the second are "charges" 2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17.
3. Of the third are "charges" 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8. 4. Of the fourth are "charges " 6, 7, 12, 13, and 14.
For reasons already suggested, I must not offer any advice to F. E., touching the mode of supplying the deficiencies or correcting the excesses of the "List," with respect to the statements in Council or the letter to Lord Stanley.
But I have no hesitation in saying, that the whole of my correspondence with you, including the appendices, ought to be laid before the Commission, together with this my very respect ful remonstrance.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your very obedient serving,
(Signed)
T. C. ANSTEY
The Hon. W. T. Bridges, Esq., D.C.L., A.C.S.