M = Iravers of the Hong Kong Civil Service had both been called upon to pay chits for which they had never incurred the debt imputed to them. In the case of M? Sherrard, a woman named Millie Cecil had repeatedly pestered him with their bill.
One evening, she waited on him until one person in his office came in when the address was admitted that it was a case of mistaken identity. From the description which the woman gave of the person who had presented himself as Mr. Sherrard, Mr. Sherrard was led to the conclusion that it must have been Mr. Hearn.
In the case of Mr. Travers, Mr. Travers paid the money, fifteen dollars, when requested to do so, and imagined that it must have been Mr. Hearn who had had it sent to him from reports which he had previously heard to the effect that Mr. Hearn had personated Sir William Wiseman and his servant in a similar manner.
This Excellency then states that in consequence of the serious nature of the imputations contained against Mr. Hearn's character in the memorandum just read, he had called upon that gentleman to clear himself from the charges. According to Mr. Hearn's report, he denied the charges seriously, asserting that Sir William Wiseman himself had, in speaking to him about it, treated it in a jocular manner, and had looked upon it as a mistake only and not as a deliberate attempt at personation, and finally he requested that he might be confronted with his accusers.
His Lordship was willing to carry out his wishes in this respect.
Page 232