2
(“China Mail" of 21st January, 1870.)
All who regard the exercise of even-handed justice with satisfaction, and are less
303 desirous of finding some trivial error in the form of proceeding to find fault with, than of feeling satisfaction at the escape of innocent men from a shameful death, will rejoice to learn that the Chinese recently tried and convicted for the Sowkewan tourder have been pardoned, and we believe already set at liberty. It has seldom happened that any case involving Chinese life, and mainly Chinese evidence only, has been the subject off such common discussion as the recent "perjury case" which arose from the trial above, mentioned. No doubt this is partly owing to the fact that a European Police Inspector was mixed up in the case in a way which revealed serious faults (to use the mildest term) in the course of proceedings adopted by the Police department to "get up" the evidence in the case. It is urged that Inspector DALY, who upon this occasion appears to have been the great mover in the whole affair, acted strictly under either the orders or permissive instructions of his superiors. it be literally true, but converts the injudicious zeal of a subordinate member of the But this plea, if indeed force, into a grave reflection upon the officers who either permitted or directed the j objectionable course of conduct in question. If, on the other hand, the steps taken by the Inspector, DALY, to secure by such tortuous means the attendance of the necessary witnesses and to ensure their giving precisely the evidence required, were unknown to his immediate superiors, to the Captain Superintendent of Police or to the law officers) of the Crown who conducted the prosecution, the charge of insufficient organization is not less heavy against the department. If Inspectors can wield the powers exercised by DALY in this case--powers with which the law does not even entrust the Superin- tendent-the public, whether native or foreign, can have no possible security that they will not be again used to but too effectually do what was very nearly done in the Sowkewan case-secure the conviction and execution of innocent men. jabsolutely have witnesses detained to give false evidence (as it proved to be), the said detention being opposed to every principle of British law, unsanctioned as it was by Legal Authority.
Here we
The great moral to be derived from the whole of this lamentable affair is this: that (firstly) subordinate employés of the Police should not be allowed to take any steps without the written sanction of their superiors, reporting at the same time all they do for record, and if need be, for production in Court; and (secondly) that the system of rewards, as at present carried out, is fraught with great evil. As regards the former proposition, it is too self-evident to require any arguments in proof of it. Upon the question of rewards, however, there may be some difference of opinion. The main (object of such offers is, as a rule, the offering of an inducement to associates in, but not the actual perpetrators of a crime to come forward as "Queen's evidence" and testify against the most guilty culprits. Whatever may be the advisability of such a pro- ceeding amongst Europeans (and it seems to us open to question on principle even in such cases) there can be no doubt that it is most pernicious amongst Asiatics. They are wanting in the respect for an oath and the fear of punishment for perjury which obtains to some extent amongst the most abandoned of the criminal classes at home. In the case of Chinese evidence, the reward is (to coin a phrase) "sublet."
"The chief mover is, we will say, promised $500 if he succeeds in discovering certain murderers. He immediately shares his prospective rewards with another, to whom he offers $200 if he will produce the necessary evidence. Number two then makes his offer of various sums to associates or rather employés, amounting perhaps to some $60 or $70; and they in turn suborn witnesses for sums varying from $10 to little more than as many cents. It will thus be seen that, even presuming the honesty and good faith of the principal informer-in this case a Police Inspector-the system, owing to the custom prevalent amongst low class Chinese, is radically wrong from the way in which it offers a premium to roguery, and that too in a manner which almost defies detection.
As far as we can judge, there would appear to be only one way of putting a stop to the production of false evidence in the way which has become so disgracefully notorious, viz., by making the amount of the reward dependent upon the recommend ation of the Captain Superintendent, and by lessening its money value in favour of honorary distinction. Inspectors of Police, for instance, should be taught to look rather for the distinction of being mentioned in terms of praise in a government notification which should count towards bonus on discharge or pension, than to making a certain number of dollars in hard cash. The uncertainty, moreover, of the amount of money consideration would operate against offers to blackguard Chinese of so many dollars in the event of their procuring the necessary evidence. Fair expenses must of course be guaranteed, but this should be all. Were the suggestion we yesterday published, that our Police be in future recruited from the military forces, adopted, it would be found that increase of pay and pension and the granting of good conduct badges would be ample stimulants to zeal and ability, while avoiding the worst features of the present "informer" system.
There is room for sharper comment than we have made upon the conduct of both Inspector and perjurers in the recent case, but as the latter have been punished and the conduct of the former is under consideration, the ends of justice will for the present perhaps be better served by avoiding any reference to the disgraceful features which have been made public.