No. 1. Total of sums of money on it, $148.90 to $149.70.
6. A signed receipt for rent of 2nd floor 198, Hollywood Road for 3rd and 4th moons, $16.00; occupied by Yik Kei. Dated 9th day, 5th moon, 23rd Kwangtung (1897).
7. Apparently a rough balance sheet of receipts and expenditure up to the 11th day (no month given). Total, $9,456.36. Total, $9,445.50. Loss, $10.86.
8. On one side 36 names with numbers under them. On the other 10 names with sums of money under them. Two short memoranda of expenditure.
9. Similar in substance and arrangement to Nos. 1 and 5, Total of sums of money on it, $150.25.
10. Memorandum regarding some Chinese constables who have joined the force, left, or "gone abroad."
11. List of 8 articles of jewellery.
12. A long list of persons with sums of money against their names, and the names of the persons to whom the money was actually paid.
13. An account book. Commences on the 29th of the 11th moon (no year given) and goes down to the 28th of the 3rd moon. There is one entry for each day—the balance in favour of or against the house. On the 28th of the month a balance of the entries for the preceding month is struck. On 28th of 3rd moon there is a credit balance of $2,381.60.
14. Similar to the above. Commences on the 29th of the 3rd moon and goes down to the 17th of the 6th moon. (No year given). Final balance. Credit, $1,788.00.
15. Similar to the above. Commences on 23rd of 7th moon Peng year (1896), and goes down to the 4th of the 5th moon Teng year (1897). Final balance: debit, Tls. 4,973.254 or $6,907.30.
16. Similar to the above. Commences on the 5th of the 5th moon Teng year (1897) and goes down to the 19th of 5th moon. No balance struck.
17. Ledger (damaged). Dates, but not in order. Value of articles pledged, $787.00. Value of articles redeemed, $121.00.
18. List of articles pledged (some redeemed) between the 21st of the 9th moon (1896) to 18th of 5th moon, 1897.
19. List of articles pledged. Commences on 17th of the 4th moon, 1895. The dates are not in order. Also contains an account of two employés with the firm.
20. This contains (1) The daily accounts for the 18th, 14th, and 15th of the 11th moon, and for the 5th moon from the 5th to 19th day. These accounts give the receipts and expenditure for the day and on the back are noted down particulars of the expenditure of the gambling house. With each account is a list of the articles received as pledges. (2) An account of the share of a man holding a share of ... in the business. From the 7th moon to the 4th moon (No year). (3) A pawn ticket. (4) Nine prescriptions. (5) A list of 12 names with sums of money against them: total, $62.70. Date 13th of 11th moon. (6) Four pieces of paper, on two of which are memoranda of accounts.
In answer to further questions by the Attorney-General, witness said that to him the books did not show the nature of the establishment, but he did not know whether the Chinese could tell. The establishment appeared to have made money last year and lost money this year, as at the time of closing they had a large debit balance. He could not tell whether the books related to Wa Lane or East Street. Witness then spoke to the entries relating to money paid to "No. 12." In regard to Sam Yeon's statements, he had been able to test the accuracy of them in many cases. Tung Kum appeared to have been general agent and distributor of money. The first part of the book produced contained the names of police officers and the latter part contained the names of persons in other departments and also of miscellaneous persons. Tung Kum and Cheng On were not at first willing to make their statements to witness; before they did make them, they were allowed to see their legal advisers. Messrs. Descon and Hastings were the advisers for Cheng On, and Mr. Reece was legal adviser for Tung Kum. Tung Kum and Cheng On were arrested on the 12th inst., and they were placed in separate cells.
His Lordship: On what ground were they arrested?
Witness: On banishment warrants issued under section 19 of the Gambling Ordinance.
Cross-examined by Mr. Robinson: The defendant had been in the Force fifteen years. He came from Bristol. His character was good. Witness was then questioned about the police rules in regard to gambling houses.
Mr. Robinson: Have you heard that watchmen not only watch premises but shadow the Inspectors and watch them to bed?
Witness: I have heard that they watch the Inspectors. I should be more correct if I said that I have heard they watch some of the Inspectors.
Cheng On said that he did not see a warrant. Is that true? I showed Cheng On a warrant and his legal adviser inspected it.
What he said is absolutely false, then? I do not think it is false.
Was the warrant also shown to Tung Kum? Yes.
Were any terms of pardon held out to Cheng On? I have not told him anything.
Perhaps you told his solicitor? I do not know anything about what his solicitor told him.
Have you held out any inducement to Cheng On or to his solicitor? No, not before he made his statement.
What was the last time you saw Cheng On for the purpose of examining him? Yesterday, I think.
He was under a long examination yesterday? Not a long examination.
By the Crown Solicitor or by yourself or by whom? By Mr. Francis.
On what date was any inducement held out to Cheng On that it would be better for him to turn Queen's evidence? There was no inducement held out to him.
What do you understand by inducement? He was not promised anything and he was not threatened in any way.
Was he given to understand anything? Not by me.
By whom? I do not know. By Mr. Francis? No.
By anyone? I do not know.
Was anyone in connection with Cheng On told that it would be better if Cheng On made a clean breast of it? No.
463
May I take it from you on oath that nothing has taken place to give Cheng On any hope that if he turned Queen's evidence it would be better for him? No, I will not say that. When Cheng On was arrested, he was told that if he told the truth about what he knew of this matter, the Government would take his case into consideration.
You do not think that amounts to anything like an inducement to turn Queen's evidence? No, I do not think so.
He being under punishment at the time? I do not think it is a direct inducement.
Mr. Robinson: I did not say a direct inducement; I said inducement.
His Lordship: Of course, we can judge ourselves of the inducement.
Mr. Robinson: I want the judgment of the witness. I think he is very much inclined to chop logic. He is sworn to tell the truth and the whole truth.
His Lordship: If there is more behind, get it out of him, but if it rests here, we can judge ourselves.
Mr. Robinson (to witness): With regard to Tung Kum, when he was arrested, did anything of the sort take place?
Witness: Yes, the same thing. He was told that if he told the truth, the Government would take his case into consideration.
Was he told who was to be the judge of the truth? He was not told.
Do you remember three detectives, whom Mr. Reece represented, being arrested under banishment warrants with respect to this case? Yes.
......