14
that he was a Coolee who had oscaped, when it was most clearly proved that he was nothing of the kind, but a well known broker, was so astonishing that you could not rest until you had made the public ac- quainted with the crime that had been perpetrated by the imposition practised.
And now, in order that you may the better comprehend my reason for asking the question, and my general motive for the foregoing en- quiries, I must explain to you that when the shopkeeper whom Mr Caldwell speaks of having been convicted of kidnapping was brought into the gaol, his story to me was that he had had no more to do with the busi- ness of the men going to Havana than to receive out of their advances a sum of money duc for having boarded them that only 10 men had agreed to go to Havana, and the rest went to the Straits, whither they would all have goue if money could have been obtained in an advance of wages.
This, in effect, was a contradiction of the purport of the prosecution, which had for its presumed object the punishment of one supposed to be an experienced Kidnapper. The Shop-keeper's story if true, goes, in short, to prove that he was no Kidnapper at all. When therefore I saw that Mr. Caldwell, for reasons since become too apparent, had suborned evidence to prove that the whole 45 had been kidnapped and coerced, I resolved on asking you, as I have recently done (and should have asked before but that I waited to see the result of the investigation by the Executive Council of the Hongkong government into the matter)-how you arrived at the fact stated in your narrative published in the Daily Press that "we found that the most part of the 40 and odd Coolees had already been shipped on board the Emile Pereire.? "Your answer is that you did not as certain it at all; but that you concluded it was so because Mr Caldwell said so.
26
Further questioned you say you did not see the books of the hong, nor the proprietor of it, on the occasion of your calling with Mr Caldwell; and you do not see how Mr Caldwell was satisfied that the thirty and odd Coolees which had left the Sun-fook-tie hong for the Emilie Pireire were Coolees who answered to the names and description" given by Ng Ahsoong; and Florentino dos Remedios, Interpreter, on being question. ed by me, confirmed what you said, viz that no books were produced, nor was any evidence given of the Coolees answering to any particular des- cription. Coupling this with the fact of the informer proving to be an in- postor, I am confirmed in my belief that the shop keeper, convicted on Mr. Caldwell's suborned evidence, told the truth when he said only ten had gone on or agreed to go to Havana.
In further corroboration of the convict's story to me, that he received only a small amount of money-(and at the Police Court on his first
318
15
examination he said the amount got by him was $163 and 33 tarls- say in all 205 dollars)-as you are aware, the Interpreters whom you sent to examine the books of the Sun-fook-tie long, and whose depositions you supply to me, found entries of payments to one Lo (Mr.) Sum (auswering to the name Sun Ahing) of $2024 and these payments were wa in the exact period which according to the evidence of Absoong, Shum A- hing staid at Macao, viz from the 26th of December to the 12th of January. Now the broker Asooag said that he heard the Coolees were sold for $27 each. This for Ten would be 275; and if to the 202 found as above, as paid to Shura Ahing, is added the 72 before found entered in the Sun-fook-tie hong's book as to the broker Asoong, it is as complete a corroboration as we could have of Shum Ahing's state- ment that 10 only took advance (after the rate of 27 ench) out of the aggregate of which he received what was due to bin, and Ascong the ac- tual broker, got the rest,
Mr. Caldwell, with an extraordinary penchant for inputing evil motive to all whose testimony is adverse to rim, has charged this entry of pavinent of 72 dollars to Ahsoong as a forgery. Forgery or not it was impossible at the time to see that the figures would dovetail with the others mention- ed, and so form an indis putable proof of the truth of the wrongfully con- victed Shum Ahing's story,
Besides, had he, Shum Aling, got $27 each for 45, he would have taken to Hongkong over 1200, and with such a sum in hand, or at command, would hardly have laid in the debtor's goal two days awaiting bail when arrested on a debt of $178, for which he had become liable on account of the wife of Mah chow wang; in fact it is now notorious that he was too poor to fee a lawyer to defend him on his trial.—
I have the honor to be,
Sir, Your obedient Servant.
WILLIAM TARRANT.
Enclosed marked C.
On the nineteenth day of February, in the year of our Lord One Thou- sand Eight hundred and sixty two, personally came and appeared before me Eugenio Leonardo Lauca, Esquire, Her Britannic Majesty's Acting Consular Agent at Macao, Leon Boyé Esquire, Agent in Macao of the Company General Maritime of Paris, who did solemnly declare and state as follows:-
I, Leon Boyé, having read the printed deposition of Mr. D. R. Cald- well on the 2nd day of February 1860, before Mr. W. H. Mitchell,
-1