have received the money I cannot tell ; but the only person that I knew
22
of that name and whom I , as well as the police, went in search of, re
turned to the Colony a short time after the close of the Commission of
Inquiry. She came voluntarily to my house saying that she had heard
that I had been in search of her. I told her of the charge I had against
her. She stoutly denied ever having asked for or received any money
in my name whatever from the pawnbrokers or their friends, and desired
to be confronted with the parties who had alleged that she had done so.
I took her to the Police Station and laid a charge against her of receiving
money in my name, before the Inspector then on duty there, who happen
ed to be the same man (Lyons) whom Mr. May had employed to elicit
evidence against me from Boggs, the pirate. Lyons immediately sent
for the witnesses from the pawnbroker's shop. The only one who came
was Low Shing Keet, the witness who deposed before the Commissioners
that he had paid the money to the woman he called Shap Lok with his
own hands. On being confronted with Shap Lok he stated positively
that she was not the woman. I pressed him hard upon the subject, but
he adhered to his statement, adding that the woman he had paid the
money to was a much younger woman than the one before him. There
being no other evidence, and the witness persisting in his statement,
there was no alternative but to discharge the woman, which was accord
ingly done.
There was no other woman that I knew of at that time by the name
of Shap Lok, nor has any such person been since brought forward by the
pawnbrokers or their friends, although they were charged to produce the
woman they said they had paid the money to.
These facts I think fully disprove Mr. Anstey's assertions as well as
his insinuations.
It is not an uncommon practice with the Chinese (and Mr. Anstey
well knows it) to endeavour to obtain money from persons in trouble in
the name of some public officer, under the pretence of securing the influ
ence or favor of that officer in their behalf. I have had occasion to pro
secute Chinese in no less than three instances for having obtained or at
tempted to obtain money in this manner in my name. Mr. Anstey him
self admits in his letter to the Secretary of State that bribes had more
sAd ă
than once been offered to himself, and there are some wealthy officers
still in the police who are not strangers to the latter practice.
The next charge Mr. Anstey makes against me (again on the autho
rity of Mr. May) is, with having used " for the purposes of private mo
nopoly " the powers vested in me under the recent Ordinance for the re
gulating, licensing and registering of brothels in the Colony- and with
having granted " at least one license to a brothel built on land belonging
to himself." And he calls in question the truth of a declaration made by
23
me to His Excellency the Governor, that at the time I was appointed to
carry out the provisions of the Ordinance as Licenser of Brothels, I did
.
not own any land whatever in the Colony.
I proved clearly to the satisfaction of the Commission of Inquiry by
the evidence of two of the Clerks of the Treasury Office- by the evidence
of the Solicitor employed to prepare the transfer, and by the evidence of
the purchasers of the land that the eleven lots referred to by Mr. Anstey
as having been registered in my name, had all been sold by me and had
been paid for by the purchasers in the month of June 1857, five months
before I was appointed , to the above office,* and that at the time I was so
appointed I held no lands or houses whatsoever in the Colony. The
account current rendered to me by my Agents, Messrs. Siemssen & Co.
(still in the hands of the Commissioners) also shewed that the purchas
money of these lots had been received by them for me in the month of
June 1857. It is true that some delay (for which I was not responsible)
arose in the preparation of the deeds of transfer ; but possession had been
taken and other rights of ownership exercised by the purchasers imme
diately after payment of the purchase money in June 1857.
The nature of the information given by Mr. May to Mr. Anstey on the
subject may be judged of by the following extract from his evidence
given before the Commission when this charge was under investigation.
He says : " In consequence of the information I received and of the fact
"that in a book of mine I found that Mr. Caldwell appeared to be the
"registered owner of lot 241 B. on which a brothel stood, I communi
"cated to the Attorney General my belief that that house was in fact
" owned by Mr. Caldwell."
The proverb that people who live in glass houses ought not to throw
stones was never more applicable than it is in the present instance to
Messrs. Anstey and May. They charge me with using and perverting
the powers I possessed under the new Ordinance as Crown Licenser of
brothels " for my own profit," and for the " private purposes of mono
poly." They do not say what this monopoly was, but their meaning may
be inferred when they add, that " at least one license had been granted
by me to a Chinese brothel built upon land which belonged to myself."
That they completely failed in making out this charge against me I have
already shewn, as I proved to the satisfaction of the Commissioners that
I owned neither lands, houses, nor brothels. But it was notorious, and
the fact is not denied by Mr. May, that he was himself, previous to the
passing of the Ordinance, the owner of several houses in the Colony
which, to his knowledge, were used as brothels. And even after the
* The Ordinance was passed and I was appointed in November 1857.
24
passing ofthe Ordinance his own kept mistress, a Chinese woman , lived
within two or three feet of a house kept by a woman named Atai, which
was used for several months as a brothel without having a license, and
without any action on the part of Mr. May to suppress it, as it was his
duty to do under the new Ordinance, as Superintendent of Police. He
could not but have known the character of the house, since it was con
tiguous to that of his mistress , and he was in the daily habit of passing
it. The neighbours had complained about this house, which they de
nounced as a nuisance, and Mr. May was ordered by the Acting Colonial
Secretary to take measures to suppress it. He never did so however.
There may have been a reason for it. That his friend Mr. Anstey was
a frequent visitor at that house I have abundant proof, but it is of too
disgraceful a nature for publication. Other Europeans were in the habit
of frequenting the house also, and the fact of its being a public brothel
was never doubted. The Acting Colonial Secretary finding that Mr.
May had done nothing in the matter, desired me to take measures against
the house. I accordingly went to the house at night. I distinctly heard
the voices of several women upstairs. I demanded admission, but was
kept outside for nearly half an hour before the door was opened. On
searching the house I was surprised at not finding any of the women,
though there were three Europeans (males) in the house. I looked
about to discover the means by which they made their escape. The
only outlet to the street was the door through which I entered and
before which I had stationed a constable. It was not possible for them
to have escaped by that door without being observed by myself and the
constable. The windows had all iron gratings, through which exit was
impossible ; but there was a sky-light, to which a ladder was attached,
leading to the roof of the house. The house itself was a three-storied
one, some 35 or 40 feet high . The houses adjoining it on either side
were both low houses, the roofs of which were fully 15 feet lower than
L
that of the brothel, a leap which Chinese women would not be likely to
attempt ; besides they must in their fall have smashed a large number
of tiles, if they did not go through the roof; not a tile was misplaced .
Immediately at the back of this brothel however stood a house which so
nearly adjoined the brothel that the walls were only separated by a space
of about 24 inches. This house was rather higher than the brothel, and
a window belonging to it was just on a level with the roof of the latter.
It was perfectly easy for any one to step from the roof of the brothel
on to the sill of this window (the window was fully 4 feet high-the
venetian frames opening outwards) and thus enter the house. This was
the house of Mr. May's kept-mistress already mentioned. There was
not a doubt on my mind at the time that the prostitutes had made their
25
escape from the brothel into the house of Mr. May's kept-mistress through
this window, especially as I was aware that this woman had been her
self in the habit of purchasing young girls for the purposes of prostitu
tion . There were no other possible means of escape except by a leap
which must either have broken the limbs of the women or killed them :
I returned into the brothel and took the woman Atai into custody as
being the keeper of it.
When the case came on for hearing before the Magistrate, Mr. Anstey
appeared at the Magistrate's Court, not however to aid the prosecution
as Attorney General, but rather, as it appeared to me, to watch the case
for the Defendant. He certainly volunteered the opinion against me,
that I had no right to apprehend the woman and that I ought to be
prosecuted for damages for so doing.
The case against the woman Atai however was too clear to admit of
a doubt. She was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of 75 Dollars.
I was compelled to state in my evidence at the trial my belief as to the
manner in which the women escaped from the unlicensed brothel. Mr.
May took great offence at this when he heard of it, and complained to
the authorities of my having made an unwarrantable use of his name.
He did not deny that the house was that of his kept-mistress , but he
repudiated the imputation of the escape of the prostitutes from the
brothel into his house.
After the trial, Mr. May sent his head Inspector, Mr. Jarman, to
inspect the premises, and hearing that the latter had sent in a report, in
which he stated it as his opinion that escape through that window was
impossible, I requested Mr. Jarman to accompany me to the brothel and
make another inspection of the two premises in my presence. He did
so. After I had pointed out to his notice the different parts of the pre
mises, and in particular the sky-light-the close proximity of the window
of the house of Mr. May's mistress to the roof of the brothel, and the
great height of the brothel above the two side-houses, I asked Mr.
Jarman for his opinion. He said he should like to think over the matter
and would let me know the next morning ! I did think it strange that
a Police Officer of ten years ' standing, holding the responsible office of
Head Inspector of Police, should be at a loss to form an opinion at once
upon so simple a matter, and I suggested that it would be far easier for
him to do this with his eyes upon the spot than at a distance from it. He
still preferred taking time to " consider the matter." I anticipated what
the result would be. The next morning, as a matter of course, he gave
his opinion that the women could not have escaped through the window
of the house belonging to his Superintendent's mistress ; but he did not
say by what other means they could possibly have made their escape.
26
Mr. May's complaint and my explanation having been laid before His
Excellency the Governor, it resulted in Mr. May receiving a severe re
primand, and myself an entire exculpation .
This case may possibly throw some light on the extraordinary interest
or rather apprehension manifested by Mr. May when the new Registrá
tion Ordinance was about to be discussed in Council , under which the
powers of the Registrar General were to be further enlarged. Mr.
Anstey in his letter to the Secretary of State, says, " On that day the
" Bill for Chinese Registration and Regulation (which afterwards be
" came Ordinance No. 8 of 1858 , ) stood for discussion in the Legislative
" Council. A letter from the Superintendent of Police [ Mr. May] was
"6 put into my hands ENTREATING me to cause some provision to be
" " introduced to restrain Mr. Caldwell, his Chinese wife , their family
" and their servants from abusing to their own profit the large powers .
"(
over persons and property which would be made permanent in his
" hands as the Registrar General and Protector of Chinese within Hong
" kong by that Ordinance." The reasons for Mr. May's alarm are best
known to himself. The only instance of alleged abuse of the powers
entrusted to me, brought forward by Messrs . May and Anstey, being the
already disproved charge that I had granted one license for a Chinese
brothel built on land belonging to myself.
Mr. Anstey goes on to say that the powers of the Registrar General
and Protector of Chinese under the ordinance “ were so largely increased
" in favor of the individual then recently raised to them, as to attract
" the notice of Downing Street and to cause the disallowance of the
" most dangerous of these new provisions ; but not until they had done
" much mischief by the manner in which he had exercised them." Mr.
Anstey does not state what these " dangerous " powers were, nor the na
ture of the mischief which he alleges had arisen from the exercise of
them . The only provision which the Authorities in Downing Street
disallowed, was the personal registration of the Chinese of the Colony, .
a measure which I had myself disapproved of as being likely to cause
vexation and annoyance to the people. These increased powers confer
red no benefit on myself, but on the contrary, added much to the irk
someness of my duties.
Mr. Anstey in continuation adds, " in the interval however his other
" office, that of Crown Licenser of brothels, had been specially created
for him,” leaving it to be inferred that I derived some pecuniary benefit
from the appointment, which was not the case, although it is probable
the Legislative Council thought that the Registrar General was the fit
test officer to carry out the provisions of this new Ordinance from his
being also Protector of Chinese, an Office created in 1846, and against
27
which Mr. Anstey seems to have formed so great an antipathy during
the time of my incumbency. The objects contemplated in forming this
office were, that there should be some special officer to whom the Chi
nese, who compose the principal part of the large and fluctuating popu
lation of the Colony, and who are in general ignorant of our laws and
customs, might in the first instance go to make their complaints, state
their difficulties and prefer their applications. It is the duty of the
Protector of Chinese to point out to them the course they ought to adopt.
It is his duty to attend at the Police Courts and see that they have the
means of bringing their complaints properly before the Magistrates in
cases in which he may conceive that his assistance is necessary, and to
aid them in their defence in cases which may appear to him to have been
got up for the purpose of oppression or extortion . It is his duty also ,
according to the ordinance, " to use his best endeavours to prevent the
"commission of crime and to discover and apprehend the perpetrators
" thereof, and generally to protect the Chinese inhabitants of the Colony."
The Protector of Chinese is also the medium of communication between
the Chinese and the Government. The duties of this office remained
almost a dead letter until I was called to fill it in 1856. Mr. Inglis, the
first Registrar General and Protector of Chinese (though afterwards a
good Chinese linguist) possessed only a partial knowledge of the lang
uage during the time he held the appointment, and Mr. May, who was
for some time afterwards Officiating Registrar General and Protector of
Chinese, not only knew nothing of the language, but could never recog
nize the face of a Chinaman unless he had seen it at least some four or
five times. I was expected , from my thorough knowledge of the lang
uage and my intimate acquaintance with the people, to give the office
that efficacy and utility which the local legislature intended, and thus
the duties of Registrar General were considerably augmented.
In November 1857 the Ordinance for the regulating, licensing and
registering of brothels in the Colony was passed and I was appointed to
carry out its provisions, which involve not only very onerous and very
unpleasant duties, but often necessitate my going out at night. This is
the office which Mr. Anstey says was " specially created for me."
In May 1858 the " Markets Ordinance " was passed in Legislative
Council, and under its provisions the Registrar General was appointed
Collector of all the Market-rents, adding still more to his duties . But
neither to the office ofCrown Licenser of Brothels nor to that ofCollector
of Market-rents was any salary attached , and I have been performing
the duties of these two new appointments, with those of Registrar Gene
ral and Protector of Chinese, without any addition whatever having been
made to my original salary for the increased duties and responsibilities
28
thrown upon me. So far therefore from deriving benefit , as Mr. Anstey
wishes it to be inferred, from an office which he asserts " had been spe
cially created for me " I might with justice complain of the hardship of
imposing upon me duties of a very unpleasant and onerous nature , the
performance of which I never contemplated when the offices of Registrar
General and Protector of Chinese were offered to me in 1856 .
But Mr. Anstey's main charge against me, and upon which indeed
all his other accusations hinge, is contained in his asseverations against
the character of a man, called throughout Mah-chow Wong, but whose
proper name is Wong Akee, whom he stigmatizes as a " notorious pi
66 19
" the " Jonathan Wild of the Chinese seas
rate," a resetter of pirates,"
—with whom, Mr. Anstey asserts, I have been long criminally connected,
and with whom, he alleges, I have participated in the profits of his alleged
piratical adventures ! This is Mr. Anstey's best trump card. All the
resources of his subtle and fertile mind- all the influence which Mr. May
* possessed as Head of the Police all the energies, craft and tactics of
the two combined, were strained to the utmost, and brought to bear
upon this particular accusation ; because they knew that if they could
but succeed in inducing the Commissioners to believe that this charge
was a true one, my dismissal from the service was certain ; Mr. Anstey's
object would be attained- his vindictive feelings against me would be
gratified, and Mr. May would then, in all probability, succeed to the
office of Registrar General and Protector of Chinese which he had
so long coveted . To bring about this result it was necessary for them,
in the first place, to shew that Wong Akee was the reprobate they repre
sented him to be. In this particular matter Mr. May takes the more
prominent part of the two - no doubt rightly conceiving that, as Super
intendent of Police, his allegations would carry weight with them.
With all Mr. May's evident desire, however, to shew that Wong Akee
was a pirate, he does not dare to say that he knew him to be one, because
if he did, he would be called upon to give some instance of his piratical
acts, which he know he could not do ; -but he makes such statements as
the following : " I know that Boggs was with pirates, and I believe that
" those pirates had communication and had confederated with Ma- chow
46
Wong." In another place he says " I believe, from information I re
" ceived, which information is contained in my letter of the 20th July,
"that Mah-chow Wong was in intimate connection with several well
"known pirate chiefs." Again : " As a matter of repute and notoriety,
" I know that Mah- chow Wong has for years been a recipient of bribes
"from gambling house-keepers, a confederate of pirates, and a receiver
" of stolen goods." What was Mr. May about that he did not bring to
justice so notorious an offender ? He says the Chinese were reluctant
29
39
to give evidence against him because of his " well known position"
with regard to myself. During 1855 and 1856 I was for seventeen
months out of the service, unconnected with the government, and fre
quently absent from the colony in my steamer. What was there then
to prevent the Chinese from coming forward to give evidence against
Wong Akee, who was all the time in the Colony ?
Mr. May speaks in another place of his ability to produce evidence to
shew a connection between Po-Pak Shing, -said to be a notorious pira
te-and Wong Akee, the witness being one of his own constables- a
Portuguese named De Silva- whose evidence I will advert to in a sub
sequent part of this paper. In another part of his evidence Mr. May
also states that he " always found that Mah-Chow Wong was always
"interested either for or against pirates " --which piece of evidence cer
tainly makes as much for Wong Akee as against him. Mr. May, however,
relies principally upon some memoranda extracted by himself from the
books and papers of Wong Akee which had been seized by the Police
at the time of his arrest. Mr. May was assisted in his examination of
the books and papers by his Interpreter Tong Akü, whose brother, be it
known, was dismissed from his situation of Interpreter to the Police
Court for corresponding with pirates upon information given by Wong
Akee himself. Mr. Anstey also lays great stress on the contents of these
memoranda as possessing, according to his ideas, " undoubted evidence
of the piratical nature of Wong Akee's dealings." I shall make some
remarks on the contents of these memoranda hereafter.
The only other evidence on this point, is that of Mr. Dixson, at that
time Editor of the " China Mail " newspaper. He says " I had heard
"from many Chinese that he (Wong Akee) was a notorious extortioner,
"owner of pirate vessels and fitter-out of piratical expeditions." These
were sweeping accusations certainly, but when Mr. Dixson was asked by
the Commissioners if he could hand in the names of any of his informants
he could not do so ! He did not even answer their question , but said
he " would quote one instance of extortion ," which he did, but which
was not according to fact, and had nothing whatever to do with piracy.
Excluding, therefore, the case in which Wong Akee was lately con
victed, the above contains all the evidence I have been able to find
given before the Commission to prove that Wong Akee was a "notorious
pirate " a " resetter of pirates," "the Jonathan Wild of the Chinese
Seas."
I do not purpose in this paper to fight Wong Akee's battle ; but as
it has been the endeavour of Messrs. Anstey and May to paint this man
in the blackest colors, in order to cast the deeper stain upon my alleged
connection with him, I deem it right to state what I know of the man
30
myself, and to make a few observations on the charges brought against
him.
I first knew Wong Akee in 1847. He was then a Fish-monger in
West Point Market. He came to me then for the first time to return
thanks as he said for some assistance he imagined I had rendered him
in a case in which he was suspected of being concerned in the conceal
ment ofsome stolen property. The only evidence against him being
the discovery of the property in a room in a public market adjoining the
one occupied by himself and another man. The evidence was so slight
that he was at once acquitted of the charge.
I was at this time Assistant Superintendent of Police and General
Interpreter, and Wong Akee gave me on one or two occasions informa
tion of the commission of crime in the Colony, which enabled me to
trace the perpetrators and bring them to justice.
Wong Akee gradually bettered his position until he became the sub
lessee of all the public fish markets in the Colony, and he was appointed
head of the Municipal Watchman for the protection of the Central
Market. After this he opened a provision shop (still retaining the
markets) and furnished several of the European residents with supplies
for their table. He did the same to myself for a short time, but finding
his charges high, I discontinued taking further supplies from him. He
appeared to be doing a prosperous business.
It was during this time that he on several occasions gave me most
important and valuable information regarding the proceedings of the
piratical fleets in the neighbourhood of Hongkong. He had peculiar
and ready means of obtaining such information from his position as sub
lessee of the fish markets and from his being a native of the maritime
district of Sun-oan, which possesses several ports, and from which the
largest class of fishing junks come, which visit Hongkong. Most of
the people belonging to these junks naturally came to him to sell their
fish, obtain their supplies, and transact their other business . The num
ber of these large fishing junks is said to be between 500 and 600
they go out to sea and scatter themselves over the neighbouring waters
to the distance of more than a hundred miles from the Colony, and as
they are almost constantly at sea pursuing their occupation, they fre
quently come into unpleasant contact with the fleets of piratical junks
which hover about. These fishermen are therefore constantly on the
watch, and they have the means of knowing, better than any other class
of sea-going people, the different piratical fleets, their proceedings, the
names of their chiefs and their places of rendezvous. All this inforına
tion the fishermen readily imparted to Wong Akee, and Wong Akee has,
often voluntarily, and often åt my request, shewn the readiest disposition
81
to impart the like information to myself. Whenever it has been practi
cable, I have acted upon the information thus obtained, and the numerous
instances in which large and powerful fleets of piratical vessels have been
destroyed by Her Majesty's ships-of- war, and peaceable trading junks
rescued from their clutches, upon information furnished to me by Wong
Akee, is the best proof, not only of the truth of his reports and of his use
fulness, but of his having no connection himself with pirates or piracy.
He had, indeed, a direct interest in the suppression of piracy, and this
may have been one of his inducements for furnishing me so often with
information of their proceedings. As renter of the fish markets it was
to his interest to have as much fish brought to the markets as possible,
for the more fish the more profit. The attacks of pirates on the fishing
vessels reduced the supply of fish. The fishermen were often deterred
from pursuing their calling from fear of being captured. Again, Wong
Akee was himself the owner of four lorchas which he employed in trading
between the different ports on the Coast of China. These vessels were as
much liable to capture by pirates as any other Chinese vessels, and for
their safety it was clearly to his interest to see piracy put down.
About five or six years ago Wong Akee extended his mercantile
operations. In partnership with others he chartered ships to California .
by which he told me he realized large profits. He afterwards, in partner
ship with others, purchased from Tam Atsoi-a man well-known in the
Colony-an American ship called the Potomac and sent her on to
California, but on her arrival there she was seized by Tam Atsoi's part
ners, who stated that Tam Atsoi had no authority to sell her. He lost
by this business nearly all that he had formerly gained, and I believe
Wong Akee still has a large claim against Tam Atsoi for selling him a
ship that did not belong to him.
All this time Wong Akee made himself extremely useful to me in my
capacity of Assistant Superintendent of Police, in furnishing me with
information, not only against pirates at sea, but also against other wrong
doers in the Colony, whose mal- practices were, by his means, brought to
light, and the offenders punished . Among these was the Chinese Inter
preter above mentioned, and he incurred a great deal of odium and the
ill-will of many, in consequence of his disclosures .
During the late war in China (1857 ) arising out of the seizure by the
Mandarins of Canton of the crew of the English lorcha Arrow, this •
Colony was thrown into a state of great excitement and alarm in con
sequence of the measures adopted by the Mandarins against us. The
terror they exercised over the minds of the Chinese residing here was
such, that whole families left the place. All servants in the employ of
Europeans were threatened, and their families in China menaced, unless
32
they immediately quitted the service of their European masters and re
turned to their native districts. Nearly every European establishment
was denuded of its domestics and coolies. Our river steamers were
attacked by emissaries of the Mandarins who had taken passage on board
of them, and an attempt was made to poison the whole of the Europeans
of the Colony by arsenic being put into the bread. Large rewards were tim
offered for the head of the Lieutenant Governor of Hongkong and also 1451
for my own, and we were in nightly expectation of seeing the town in
flames. It required the greatest vigilance on the part of the Govern
ment and Police to preserve the safety of the Colony. During this
critical time, Wong Akee, on several occasions, obtained and imparted to
me most valuable and important information , by acting upon which, the
plans of the Mandarins were often frustrated . I need only mention the
fact that through his means a conspiracy was discovered in the Colony
which had for its object the capture of Colonel Caine, the Lieutenant
Governor, and myself-the conspirators having been promised a heavy
reward if they succeeded in bringing to the Mandarins our heads !
Mr. May says in his evidence before the Commission, that Wong Akee
was long known to him by repute as man of notorious bad character,
but he omitted to tell the Commissioners that he had frequently sought to
obtain the assistance of this same man himself—that he frequently asked
him to give him the same kind of information that he was in the habit of
furnishing myself-or that he was in the habit of addressing him in
terms of familiarity Wong Akee always refused to give Mr. May any
such information , saying, that he was not a paid informer, and that he
did not choose to give information to every body. Mr. May naturally
felt mortified at these rebuffs, and he reluctantly admitted before the
Commission, that he had, " from a long knowledge of the prisoner (Wong
Akee) a great dislike to him."
The secret cause of that dislike I have now revealed , and it will ac
count for all Mr. May's hostility to the man, and for the untiring and
unusual energy which he displayed, when Wong Akee was arrested, in
getting up the case—or rather cases-against him, during the whole
three weeks of their investigation at the Police Court. No one ever saw
Mr. May display any thing like the same amount of zeal and indefatiga
bility in any other case that ever came before the Police during the whole
• fourteen years of his superintendency. And why ? Because there were
not the same moving causes : animosity to myself, jealousy and envy of
the success of my public exertions and my consequent promotion over
himself in the service, and dislike and hatred of the man who had been, in
a great measure, instrumental in enabling me to achieve these successes,
and who had refused to accord the same assistance to himself.
33
During the whole period of my service under the Government of this
Colony, I had no commercial or pecuniary transactions whatever with
Wong Akee, save one or two trifling loans of money which I gave him,
and which he repaid .
When I left the service in 1855 and purchased the steamer Eaglet, I
chartered one of his lorchas, and employed him to charter seven other
vessels for me, which I loaded with cargo, and took in tow of my steamer
to Hoinam as already stated . In this speculation Messrs . Siemssen &
Co., merchants of Hongkong, myself, and the Chinese mercantile firm
of " Tychong " were partners. We allowed Wong Akee to have a share
also for the assistance he rendered us. During the time these eight
vessels remained under charter (a little under two months) they carried,
as a matter of convenience to myself, the Eaglet's private signal flag ;
and it is out of this single transaction, mentioned by me to Mr. May in
the confidence of private intercourse, that he invented the following
tale, given in evidence by him before the Commission : " When Mr.
" Caldwell was in command of the Eaglet, on one occasion I asked him
"how his marine affairs were getting on, and he told me that he was
"partner with Mah-chow Wong in a carrying trade carried on in many
"vessels, and that they owned several Chinese vessels. (!) I observed ,
" if you let the Eaglet be engaged in these expeditions against pi
"rates (?) you will have a combination against you and have the Eaglet
"
' snapped up ; and he said no fear of that, such is the fame and terror
"caused by the Eaglet, that many vessels have applied to us and we are
"
' thinking of granting the Eaglet's flag as a pass ofprotection.” (!)
And, as if the absurdity of this wanton mis-statement was not already
great enough, Mr. Anstey, in his pamphlet, endorses it in the following
still more exaggerated terms : " And it was with this man, that accord
66
ing to Mr. Caldwell himself, who reluctantly admits it after it had
" been proved by many witnesses-a partnership in at least eight Chi
(1
nese lorchas subsisted from the beginning of 1855 ifnot earlier, down
(6
to the end of 1856, if not later." (!)
As to the doubts which Mr. Anstey seems inclined to cast on this
particular speculation , I can only say that the trade was as legitimate as
any other that is carried on in Chinese ports- that it has since been fol
lowed by other European merchants in Hongkong--that I received the
permission of the head Mandarin of the Island to sell and purchase goods
-that the Mandarin himself paid me complimentary visits on board my
steamer every time I arrived there ; and the fact of my having been
joined in this speculation by a house of such high standing and well
known respectability as that of Messrs. Siemssen & Co. of Hongkong, is
84
a sufficient guarantee, if any were wanting, that there was nothing ob
jectionable in it.
It was during this time also that I lent Wong Akee 500 Dollars to
enable him to lengthen a lorcha belonging to him, for which he wished
to obtain a Colonial register. To secure myself for the advance, I had
the lorcha registered in my own name. In October 1856, Wong Akee
having repaid the loan, my interest in the vessel ceased, and I notified
the same, at the time, at the Colonial Secretary's office at Hongkong ; but
the vessel being then absent on a trading voyage to Cochin China, the
Register could not be cancelled, and she did not return until the follow
ing April.
It has been attempted to be shewn that this lorcha was engaged in
piratical pursuits . The first master of her was a European of the name
of Johnston, a correct and respectable man, who left her because he could
not agree with the Chinese on board. Wong Akee wished to get another
European master for her, and asked me to assist him in doing so. As I
was about to be absent from the Colony, I asked the Harbour Master, as
a favour, to get a good and trustworthy man to take command of her.
He put on board an Englishman named Bancroft, who had formerly
been master of a ship, and he remained in her until the month of April
1857. Is it at all likely that Wong Akee would have given the com
mand of his lorcha to a European who was a perfect stranger to him—
whom he had never seen before, and who had been sent to him by the
Harbour Master of the Colony, if he used the lorcha for piratical pur
poses ? The thing is absurd on the face of it. The lorcha had been
dispatched on a trading voyage to Cochin China, and on her return , she
was chased by pirates in to a place called Ma-me, about 150 miles from
Hongkong, and there blockaded for the space of two months and up
wards. On his arrival here, Captain Bancroft reported the circumstance
at the Colonial Office, where I happened to be at the moment, and this
was the first time I had ever seen him. The fact of the lorcha being
attacked by Chinese pirates is another proof that she could not have
been a piratical vessel herself, for there is " honor even among (piratical)
thieves "-they never attack each other for purposes of plunder.
During the time I was engaged with the Eaglet and not in Govern
ment employ, I employed Wong Akee to superintend the building of
some small houses for me: I likewise employed him to negociate the
purchase of a piece of ground from a Chinaman whom he brought to me
himself, and I entrusted him on one or two occasions with the collection
of some small sums of money due to me by Chinese for freight, who hap
pened to be better known to him than they were to my Agents. There
were also a few other small matters in which I made use of his services,
35
but of too trivial a nature to be detailed. These comprise the whole of
the transactions I ever had with Wong Akee in the way of business,
commercial or pecuniary, and in all of them I found him punctual and
trustworthy. All this happened, be it remembered , when I had no con
nection whatever with the Government service. I was my own master,
independent of official restraint, and at liberty to trade and transact bu
siness with whom I pleased. I never knew Wong Akee to be a pirate
or a confederate of pirates, nor had I any reason to suspect that he was
ever engaged in any such practices. I think I can safely say that I have
known almost every fleet of piratical vessels that have ever committed
depredations at sea within a radius of 400 miles of Hongkong, as well as ·
the names of all noted pirate chiefs . I have been engaged, in numerous
instances, in tracking them to their haunts on nearly every part of the
coast in Her Majesty's ships of war, and have been instrumental in the
capture or destruction of the most noted and most dreaded of these bold
marauders ; and it is strange indeed that if Wong Akee was the " no
torious pirate " which Messrs. Anstey, May, and Dixson would make
him out to be, I should never once have fallen in with this " Jonathan
Wild of the Chinese seas," or some of his vessels , in all my many cruises ,
or that any of Her Majesty's ships, similarly occupied, should never
have met with some traces of him, or his vessels, or learnt something of
their doings !
It has been said also that the " numerous cases " brought against
Wong Akee at the Police Court, prove him to be a notorious pirate and
a confederate with pirates. Now I challenge Mr. May and Mr. Anstey
to produce from the records of the Police a single case of piracy, or of
confederating with pirates brought against Wong Akee previous to the
one upon which he was lately convicted, and which I will refer to more
particularly presently. Where then is the evidence of his being a " no
torious pirate," a " resetter of pirates," the " Jonathan Wild of the Chi
nese seas "? Where, except in the unfounded statements of Messrs.
Anstey and May ; in vague Hongkong rumours, and in the columns of
the China Mail newspaper under the editorship of Mr. Dixson ? It is
true the other papers of the Colony took up the cry, and the whole pack
were down upon him, but it is only those who are ignorant of the
morale of a Hongkong newspaper, who place any reliance on its strict
ures on personal character-always scurrilous - seldom or never truthful.
According to these sorry representatives of the fourth estate, the thriving
Colony of Hongkong is a perfect Pandemonium-the Governors and
public officers all rogues-the merchants all swindlers -the other Euro
pean inhabitants of the Colony all hungry adventurers, if not something
worse, and the Editors themselves , according to their own estimate of
36
each other, a set of reprobates, of whom nothing which they can say, is
too vile or too disreputable. I instance in particular the Daily Press and
Friend of China.
It was in this spirit of Hongkong journalism, that the China Mail,
under the editorship of Mr. Dixson, pursued the unfair and un-english
course of " writing down " Wong Akee before his trial-doing its
utmost to inflame and prejudice the public mind against him by repre
senting his character in the blackest colours, charging him with all
manner of crimes, and apparently with such success, that although the
*
evidence adduced against him at the trial was of the weakest nature,
the jury, to the astonishment of the Judge, brought in a verdict fo
guilty. One of the jurymen was heard to declare during one of the ad
journments of the case, before the evidence was concluded, and before .
the prisoner had commenced his defence, that he had made up his mind
to convict him ! The Counsel for the prisoner brought this improper con
duct of the juryman to the notice of the judge, who gave him the option
of calling another juryman, or going on with the case. The Counsel
was so confident that no conviction could take place upon such evidence,
D that he preferred proceeding with the case. I may mention also that
this case was in the first instance brought before the Chief Magistrate,
but
so weak was the evidence against Wong Akee, that he discharged
him. He ordered him however to find bail for his appearance when re
quired. It was after this that Mr. May got up another information
against Wong Akee, upon which he granted his own warrant, and Wong
Akee was again arrested, and finally committed for trial on both cases.
It is asserted by Mr. Anstey, that this second case was the strongest of
the two. The Acting Attorney General, however, was of a different
opinion. It was not tried because the prisoner had already been con
victed and sentenced on the first one. It is to be regretted that this
second case was not gone into. It would have revealed the extraordi
nary manner in which the information was got up, and other proceedings
on the part of the Police, showing a determination, at all hazards, to
crush this unfortunate man.
For Mr. Dixson's dislike to Wong Akee there was a cause. It is with
reluctance that I make any allusion to it ; but as Mr. Dixson has taken
so much pains to prejudice the public mind against Wong Akee, and as
I verily believe that his articles in the China Mail had more influence
în bringing about his conviction, than the actual evidence adduced at the
* The Acting Attorney General who prosecuted the case , stated before the Commission,
that the evidence against Wong Akee " was purely circumstantial."
+ The Chief Justice afterwards declared in Council, that he never expected such a verdict,
upon such evidence..
37
trial itself, I feel that I ought not to allow any feelings of delicacy to
wards Mr. Dixson , (against whom I bear no ill-will) to prevent my
making public, what I believe to have been the cause of his enmity to
Wong Akee, and by which he was led to make assertions against him,
which he rather wished to believe were true, than that he actually believed
them to be so.
Some time ago, before any thing was ever said against Wong Akee,
I recollect his coming to me and telling me that he was afraid he had
got himself into trouble with Mr. Dixson . He said he had had a quarrel
with Mr. Dixson's kept mistress —a Chinese Woman -who had threaten
ed to complain to Mr. Dixson against him and get Mr. Dixson to bring
him into some trouble. I told him that as long as he conducted himself
uprightly, our laws would protect him, and that he need not be under
alarm.
About this time Wong Akee was the holder by endorsement of a Pro
missory note from a woman named Akew, who was a friend of Mr.
Dixson's mistress. Twenty Dollars of the amount had been paid to him,
and on his demanding the balance, he was surprised at receiving a note
from Mr. Dixson, written in Chinese, desiring him to come and see him
on the subject, which Wong Akee said he refused to do. He was still
V more surprised, he said, when, a day or two after, he received a summons
to appear at the Police Court to answer a charge of extortion- the sub
ject of the alleged extortion being the Twenty Dollars the woman Akew
had voluntarily paid to account of her debt ! Mr. Dixson himself appear
ed against Wong Akee at the Police Court in behalf of his mistress'
friend Akew. The Chief Magistrate, Mr. Hillier, dismissed the charge
of extortion, but as he was of opinion that the money for which the note
was granted, had been advanced by the original payee for an immoral
purpose, he ordered Wong Akee to refund the Twenty Dollars he had
received ; and as the woman Akew stated that she was afraid Wong
Akee would do her some injury, he was bound over to keep the peace
towards her.
This is the case of " extortion " mentioned by Mr. Dixson in his evi
dence before the Commission, and it will be seen that Mr. Dixson was
not uninfluenced by his private feelings when he commenced his violent
public crusade against Wong Akee in the columns of the China Mail
newspaper.
But it is now time to notice the extracts Mr. May is said to have made
from Wong Akee's books and papers , seized by the Police at the time of
his arrest, and which are relied on by Mr. Anstey and him as " contain
" ing the daily evidence of the piratical occupations of Wong Akee.”
Mr. Anstey indeed goes further ; for in his letter to the Secretary of State,
38
A he says, the entries in these memoranda shew Wong Akee " to have been
66
เ 6 engaged habitually and by way of vocation in piratical operations on
the largest scale. They tell of the equipment and armament of pirate
" ships, despatch of such on piratical expeditions, resetting of pirates at
<<
home, confederacy with pirates and assessins abroad, kidnapping at
""
Hongkong and the Slave trade in the Straits of Malacca."
Mr. Anstey seems to have exhausted not only the whole list of crimes
contained in the maritime calendar, but also his own inventive powers,
fertile as they are, in the above category ; and yet there is absolutely
nothing in the whole contents of Mr. May's memoranda to justify the
propagation of a single item of the above charges.
In the same extravagant language, and with his usual habit of distorting
harmless facts into accusatory matter, Mr. Anstey puts forth the following
philippic against myself. "Those which affect Mr. Caldwell shew him to
“ have been during the whole period of those avocations of Mah-chow
" Wong in intimate and private relations with that convict. There is a
(6
message of thanks to himself through Mah-chow Wong from a Chi
66 nese Mandarin during the late war for assisting to recover and restore
" Government plunder made by the Queen's troops from the writer's sta
❝tion. There are payments of money to Mr. Caldwell and receipts from
* him and on his account. There is a transaction binding a Chinaman
" of Hongkong who has a suit for lands there to make them over (if
" the suit succeeds) to the party conducting the suit (that is to say, Mr.
" Caldwell) for the sum of 1,500 Dollars, out of which Mr. Caldwell,
“ though not a lawyer certainly, may also retain to himself the sum of
" 500 Dollars for costs ."
I have already stated the instances in which I have ever had transac
tions, either of a commercial or pecuniary nature, with Wong Akee. I
have never sought to conceal or deny them. They occurred when I was
engaged in mercantile operations, when I had no connection with the
government, and they were of a character to bear the closest scrutiny.
The " message of thanks " to myself from the Chinese Mandarin was
simply this : On my return to the service in 1856 I was directed by His Ex
cellency the Governor to proceed personally to the Chinese Commandant
at Cowlong, a small Chinese town in the immediate vicinity of Hong
kong, and to restore to him, in the name of His Excellency, certain ar
ticles which had been brought away from that Station by our troops
when they visited it a short time previously. I was to proceed with a
force from the Police, and fearing that the commandant (who had on a
previous occasion been brought away a prisoner to Hongkong) might
suppose that we were coming to seize him again, I desired Wong Akee
-who was on friendly terms with the Mandarin-to inform him of the
39
object ofmy visit. The " message of thanks " was simply the command
ant's reply to Wong Akee's letter of information .
The "payments of money to Mr. Caldwell, and receipts from him and
((
on his account " have reference solely to the transactions I have already
mentioned as having taken place between myself and Wong Akee when
I was engaged in trade. "
The last imputation Mr. Anstey throws out, is that of " a transaction
" binding a Chinaman of Hongkong, who has a suit for lands there, to
"make them over (if the suit succeeds) to the party conducting the suit
" (that is to say Mr. Caldwell) for the sum of 1,500 Dollars out ofwhich
" Mr. Caldwell though not a lawyer certainly, may also retain to
" himself the sum of 500 Dollars for costs."
Now let us look at the entry in the memoranda made by Mr. May
upon which this broad and circumstantial statement is founded. It is
as follows :
" A red paper of $1,500 transactions between Foong Hok Sheng, Wong Akee and
Mr. Caldwell.”
This is the whole of the entry. The paper itself, it seems, was not
translated, but had it been so, it would have been found to contain the
particulars of the transaction I have already referred to, namely, the
negociation for the purchase by me of a piece of ground from a man
brought to me by Wong Akee. This man (Foong Hok Sheng) was the
owner of a piece of ground in the lower bazaar which he wished to
dispose of. I had agreed to purchase it and to pay $1,500 of the
purchase money in advance, and the balance on the completion of the
transfer, and I requested Wong Akee to have an agreement drawn up
to that effect. Finding afterwards that it would be necessary for Foong
Hok Sheng to commence a law suit to eject the tenant, I paid only 500
Dollars, and the " red paper " referred to in Mr. May's memoranda was
probably the draught of the first agreement, as I subsequently obtained
another for the 500 Dollars. The statements as to my " conducting
the law suit," and the retention by me of " 500 Dollars for costs," are
pure inventions either of Mr. Anstey, or his accomplice, Mr. May.
Mr. May's memoranda contain no fewer than seventy three extracts
taken from Wong Akee's books and papers, embracing upwards of a
hundred items ; but, with one exception, I shall refer only to those
entries which have reference to my own transactions with him, and
these are :
1
" Entries in rough memorandum book 11th day 4th month 1855, one picul of rice
to Mr. Caldwell," [worth about 2 Dollars. ]
e " 26th day 4th moon paid on account of Wong-kow-man , of a Tor boat $130 to
Mr. Caldwell."
f
40
The person named Wong kow-man here spoken of, chartered, through
me, the Peninsular and Oriental Company's Steamer Canton, also the
Steamer Sir Charles Forbes, at an expense of 6,000 Dollars and upwards,
to accompany Her Majesty's ships in search of a fleet of pirates which
had captured some of his vessels. When he paid the charter money, he
was $ 130 short, which I advanced for him, and I requested Wong
Akee, to whom the charterer was well known, to get back this sum for
me, which he did, and the above is the entry of the transaction.
" Received from Atchow $10 steamer money. Entry 1 steamer $17.
" 21 day seventh month received from Mr. Caldwell $17.”
These were some small sums due to me for freight, and which, as --
before stated, I employed Wong Akee to collect. The last item should
be paid to and not " received from Mr. Caldwell " which is a mistake
probably of the translator.
"2 received by the hands of Mr. Caldwell $120."
This sum was an advance paid by me to Wong Akee for the charter
of one of his lorchas in 1855 , at which time, I chartered also seven other
vessels to carry goods to Hoi-how. To each of these vessels I paid a
like advance of 120 Dollars.
" Expense book of 1851 , 1852. Mr. Caldwell account money received from or for
11 different amounts, total 616 taels 4 maces 6 candarins only surns of money
written .'""
As I have before stated, I employed Wong Akee to superintend the
building of some houses for me, for which purpose I paid him money
from time to time, and of which the above are doubtless the entries.
The translator, however, has made a mistake in the year, as this occur
red in 1855.
" Due by Low Atuck to Mr. Caldwell $160-18 day 5 month received by Akee
this $160."
This was a sum overdrawn by the owner of one of the lorchas I had
chartered. Low Atuck, the man named in the entry, became surety to
me for its repayment. I authorized Wong Akee to receive the money
and apply it towards the building of the houses, he having about that
time applied to me for further advances :
" A letter from Cheong the present Commandant at Cowloong to Mr. Loong
(Akee's Clerk) relative to the seals and other things taken away by the military when
they visited Cowloong, thanking Mr. Caldwell and Messrs . Loong and Wong Akee
for the trouble they took in obtaining the things."
41
I have already explained the circumstances which produced this letter
of thanks from the Commandant of Cowloong.
" A red paper of $1,500 transactions between Foong Hok Sheng, Wong Kee and
Mr. Caldwell."
This has reference to the negociation for the purchase of a piece of
ground, the circumstances of which I have also already explanied.
These comprise the whole of the extracts made by Mr. May and his
interpreter from the books and papers of Wong Akee in any way relat
ing to myself. Is there in any one of them a single objectionable cir
cumstance, or aught else to justify the character given them by Mr.
Anstey ? These transactions occurred also when I was engaged solely
in mercantile and maritime speculations, and when I had nothing what
ever to do with the Government service .
In constructing the following paragraph Mr. Anstey seems to have ex
hausted the whole of his ingenuity as well as his venom . It was scar
cely possible for him to have added to the calumnious charges it contains.
I confess that on first reading it I did not know whether to believe that
these accusations were intended to apply to myself, or to Wong Akee :
“ The books and papers of the pirate had been seized in his hong. They contain
ed numerous entries of Mr. Caldwell's participation in the secret business and profits
ofthe pirate. There were entries of moneys received from him—of moneys paid or
payable to him- of arms, stinkpots and munitions of piracy supplied by or through
him—of his connection as agent or manager of the ' Sun-on Wo, ' or house of the
Sun-on people at Hongkong (the gang of Mah-chow Wong) of communications with
the Chinese enemy on the opposite shore at a time when rewards for Barbarian heads
was the subject of every proclamation-of dealings with gambling houses at Hongkong
—of administration of Mah-chow Wong's estate of Tsim-char-chow already mention
ed, on the other shore, the rightful inheritance of the Tung family, -and of the
transactions ofthe now confessed partnership in the lorchas."
To say that these atrocious charges are all grossly false, is not enough.
They are the deliberate inventions and fabrications of a man who seems
to have lost all regard for the sacred principles of truth, and who is so blind
ed by the violence of his vindictive feelings, that he ceases to observe
any distinction between the correctness of an established fact, and the
baselessness of a calumnious fabrication.
The whole of the items contained in Mr May's memoranda referring
to myself I have already given, and they therefore speak for themselves.
Whether they bear Mr. Anstey out in the above tirade of most iniquitous
accusations against me, I leave the reader to decide. Mr. May's exa
mination of these books and papers was a minute and searching one,
and had they contained any evidence in support of such charges as Mr.
Anstey sets forth in the above paragraph, neither Mr. May nor his par
42
tisan interpreter, would have overlooked it ; nor was there anything in
the subsequent examination of the same books and papers by the acting
Chinese Secretary, to justify these reckless assertions of Mr. Anstey.
Mr. Anstey says in continuation, "at a preliminary examination,
66
some of these items were read out openly in a crowded Police Court.
" Mr. Caldwell knew-he could not but have known, the existence of
" these dishonoring entries. But he made no sign of knowledge . He
" continued after as before and even to the last openly to be friend the
" Pirate whose hand had recorded those entries to his discredit."
Where are the " dishonoring entires" Mr. Anstey refers to ? They
certainly do not appear in Mr. May's extracts . Had any such entries
been read out in the Police Court, it must have been so done by the
Chinese Interpreter. Would he or Mr. May have forgotten these cri
I minating entries when they prepared their list of extracts from Wong
Akee's books and papers ? Had there been, as Mr. Anstey asserts,
" numerous entries of Mr. Caldwell's participation in the secret business
and profits of the pirate," would Mr. May have silently passed them
over and selected only those which bear no such construction ? Could
Mr. Anstey have forgotten the statement of his chief witness, Mr. May,
before the Commission in reference to these very memoranda, that “ there
66 was no entry in his memoranda to the effect that certain moneys had
" been or were to be paid out of the proceeds of plunder to or for or on
“ account ofMr. Caldwell " ? Verily Mr. Anstey possesses the art of im
proving upon his text in a remarkable degree, and his conduct in this
respect forcibly reminds one of the lying valet in Sheridan's play :
FAG. I beg pardon , Sir : but, with submission, a lie is nothing unless one sup
ports it. Sir, whenever I draw on my invention for a good current lie, I
always forge the endorsements as well as the bill.
I cannot dismiss the subject of these reckless charges without expos
ing the absurdity of one of them ; that of my having " communications
" with the Chinese enemy on the opposite shore, at a time when rewards
"for Barbarian heads were the subject of every proclamation." I have
never held communications with officers of the Chinese government ex
cept upon subjects connected with the Colonial government and by order
of the Governor. Mr. Anstey knew perfectly well, as indeed did every
one else who was in the Colony at the time he refers to, that the very
highest of these rewards (20,000 Dollars) was offered by the Mandarins
for my own head and that of the Lieutenant Governor of the Colony!
Mr. Anstey also knew, as will be seen presently, that, aided by informa
tion I had received, (for which I was indebted to Wong Akee) I disco
vered and apprehended in a house situated at the back of this island one
43
of the emissaries of the Mandarins, (he being a man belonging to the
Colony and acquainted with the persons of the Lieutenant Governor and
myself) who had been employed, with others, for the very purpose of se
curing the heads of Colonel Caine and myself ; and that I also found
concealed in this house, the letter addressed to this man by Chun-qui
Chik, the Mandarin of Sha Cheang, containing the offer of this very re
ward if he succeeded in bringing over to him either Colonel Caine's head
or my own. This man was tried at the Supreme Court for Treason, con
victed, and sentenced to transportation for life, Mr. Anstey himself con
ducting the prosecution as Attorney General of the Colony !! In the
face of this he makes the above charge against me. It is an insult to
common sense to suppose that I could be holding friendly communica
tions with the Mandarins of the Chinese government at a time when they
were seeking my life !
There is again his still more absurd statement of my (6 connection as
"agent ormanager of the ' Sun on wo ' ofthe Sun on people at Hongkong ;"
as if it were possible for a Christian to act in the management of a
heathen Congsu house ? To do this it would be necessary for him to go
through the idolatrous ceremony of what is popularly known here as
Chin Chin Joss, which consists in bowing down with the head to the
ground to idols, offering up of propitiatory sacrifices of pigs, goats,
cakes, &c. to their deities, the burning of sacrificial paper, and other
heathenish observances.
Were it not for the great length and uninteresting nature of the
extracts which Mr. May has embodied in his memoranda from the books
and papers of Wong Akee, I would publish them in extenso in order to
shew how little Mr. Anstey's statements in regard to them are entitled
to credit. With the exception of a few unimportant items, they consist
of entries which may be found in the books of every Chinese shopkeeper
in the Colony in the same line of business as Wong Akee ; and, with
the exception of one solitary item, there is nothing in any of them which