Page 22.
[68]
ral by the Ordinance, such as Registration, licensing, receiving money and sending women to Hospital. The only special duty assigned by the Ordinance to the Superintendent, is having charge of constables under the Ordinance, if such should be appointed."
Also to Mr. May's own statement before the Commission:-
"I received a letter from the Acting Colonial Secretary by direction of the Governor, by the Acting Colonial Secretary for -stating that a charge had been brought against me not carrying out the Brothels' Ordinance, and censuring me for such misconduct. I dis- tinctly state, that the cause of iny opposition to the Police being employed in carrying out the Brothel Ordinance, as I several times verbally expressed to the Acting Colonial Secre- tary, was, that it would open a floodgate for the inundation of the Police department with bribery, extortion, and corruption, and that I thought it advisable to keep the temptation from the Police. I also considered, as I several times verbally expressed, that the Registrar General was the person appointed by the Ordinance to carry out its provisions, and I was loath to interfere in his managetnent in any way."
Mr. Cleverly, the Chairman of the Caldwell Commission, was summoned by Mr. Cald- well. The charge as given above was read to him; and he was examined by Mr. Caldwell as to evidence stated to have been given by Dr. Bridges before the Caldwell Commission, but which had been expunged from their minutes. He said the Commission received all evidence that was tendered, not knowing what it might lead to. It was then printed, and all that was considered inadmissible, or irrelevant, was struck out. Had no recollection of any evidence being given by Dr. Bridges which would have supported the present charge. Remembered that Dr. Bridges expressed a general opinion that Mr. May had given tacit oppo- sition to the Brothels' Ordinance, but no proof was brought forward by Dr. Bridges in support of his opinion, or any instance of opposition mentioned to the Commission.
In reply to Mr. May, Mr. Cleverly said, Mr. Caldwell in his evidence had led the Com- inission to believe that the women had escaped from Attai's house into Mr. May's, and he never to that moment knew that Mr. Caldwell entertained any doubt on the subject.
Mr. Caldwell applied that the following papers, referred to in the extract from Dr. Bridges evidence before the Caldwell Commission, above given, should be laid before the Council and placed on the Minutes:--
Letter from Mr. May to Three Justices.
9th March."
"DEAR SIRS, -In the case in which a woman named Ahtai was defendant, charged by the Registrar General with keeping a brothel in other than the allot- ted district, and during the hearing of which you sat on the Bench, the prosecutor stated in evidence, that he had reason to believe from sounds proceeding as from persons scrambling over the roof, that the prostitutes had effected their escape into an adjoining house; that he did not enter the said adjoining house, because he believed it to be occupied by a Portuguese female, who had informed him, the prosecutor, at the time of making some assessment, that the house occupied by her was to be entered as owned by Mr. May; the prosecutor also stated some- thing about a side window in the house of the Portuguese female affording mode of ingress to the prostitutes escaping from defendant's house.
"Feeling myself wantonly insulted by the unnecessary mention of my name, and being almost certain that a very great mistake (to use the mildest word) had been made by the Registrar General, I caused some enquiries to be made: firstly, I examined the Portuguese female (Mrs. de Rozario) who positively states, and is willing to depose on oath that she never gave any information to Mr. Caldwell in which my name occurred, either personally or by her servants; that personally she has not spoken to Mr. Caldwell for years. That with regard to any assess- ment she knows no farther than that the house is assessed for Police Rate to the Chinese occupant of the basement story (opening into a lower road to that in which the front entrance of the two upper stories issue) and that for the pur- poses of Census, the Census paper was addressed in her own name.
"I also looked at the premises, and it is certain that no person could gain admission therein when fleeing over the roofs from the house of defendant. To
.
[69]
give assurance on this point I requested Inspector Jarman of the Police, to make examination of the premises, and his report thereon I enclose.
"I send these particulars to those sitting on the Bench at the time the case was heard, in order, first, to give the truth of the matter in so far as to remove from the evidence (upon which the decision was given) so much of it as by in- ference, hearsay, or direct testimony, refers to Mrs. de Rozario or her house.
"Secondly, to exhibit the culpable carelessness with which the prosecutor states on oath, matters, which upon a proper investigation, he would not have stated, because he would have ascertained the truth of the case by such investi- gation.
"And thirdly, to express my utter disgust and contempt for the person who could have the petty malignity, to mention unnecessarily, uncalled for, and when not affecting the peculiar enquiry at issue, the name of one, with whom, as is well known, the utterer is at undisguised enmity.
"I know in such a matter it would be difficult to obtain redress, because when scandal is once set abroad there is no stopping its progress, and although the falsity of an assertion may be shewn it is nevertheless remembered that an assertion or scandal has been raised, and domestic comfort may be sacrificed by the attempt to remove a foul straw blown by the dirty and biassed breath of a dishonorable enemy.-
.--I am, Dear Sirs, faitlifully and obediently yours,
The Honorable T. C. ANSTEY, Esq.”
The Honorable W. T. BRIDGES, Esq., D.C.L.” The Honorable H. T. DAVIES, Esq.
19
Dr. Bridges' reply.
"No. 125.' "
"C. MAY."
"COLONIAL SECRETARY'S OFFICE, VICTORIA,
HONGKONG, 11th March, 1858."
"SIR, I received a letter from you yesterday, having reference to a case lately heard before the Chief Magistrate. I am not aware whether you intended to address me in my private or official capacity, but I consider it to be
my duty to explain to you the action which I officially took in the matter, as it will relieve your mind of a mistake under which you are labouring with regard to the con- duct of the Registrar General.
"I had been led to suppose that a notorious brothel was, contrary to the provisions of the recent Ordinance, in existence in close proximity to a house occupied by a Portuguese female stated to be kept by you as your mistress. I do not know whether such statement is true, and I shall be very glad to learn from you that it is false, but acting on such statement and believing it up to the present time to be correct, I directed the Registrar General to attempt to obtain evidence sufficient to convict the brothel-keeper of violating the provisions of the Ordi- nance. That officer having informed me that he had obtained such evidence, I attended the Magistrate's Court as a spectator for the purpose of learning whether there were sufficient grounds for me to inform His Excellency the Governor officially that so great an obstruction existed to the carrying out of the provisions of Ordinance 12 of 1857, as the one above stated. The fact of the existence of the brothel was notorious to the Chief Magistrate, and to most of the neigh- bouring residents; if so it could hardly have been unknown by an habitual fre- quenter of an almost next door house, and if that person were the Superintendent of Police, and he took no steps to vindicate the law, I could hardly conceive a greater breach of duty on the part of an officer charged with his peculiar duties. So far from the Registrar General willingly bringing forward your name in con- nexion with this case, he was altogether avoiding any reference to any adjoining house until, at my suggestion, the Chief Magistrate clicited the facts from him,
380