356
Charges (c) and (d) were not held to be proved.
I submit therefore that Mr. Guterres should be re-instated.
This case has done curious features.
The accused is a Portuguese from Macao, & Kergue (Guterres) is suspected of being dishonest. In 1906, Mr. Pugh (who had been a ship's officer in the P.V. Cortez) stated that Guterres was in the habit of bribing ships' crews and making false reports to the Masters. The late Stanbour Master made full enquiries & found that Guterres had always been particularly helpful in preventing desertion & added that the occurrences known were irregularities and existed.
The Government could not find any evidence, except in one case alleged to have occurred 6 years ago; they could not be substantiated.
In his judgment, the present proceedings were an irritation of the S. Org. Solicitor.
I agree with Mr. Stubbs' main conclusion regarding the charges in detail, but I think that the matter deserves further attention & consideration, which, I think, shows a deplorable lack of fairness, suggesting grievous doubt as to the judicial effect.
"Home officers" (alias crimps), "Chinese 'bowing'" were low-down characters, and evidence of them should be received with great suspicion.
No Smith could have dared to make such allegations in a low court, without being supported by evidence.
The matter should be reported to the Attorney General.
No answers were given.
Again, Mr. Helens' evidence was defective, and the detective's report was found to be unsatisfactory.
46444/06
The statement at 2 o'clock was not what the Chance had stated of his own knowledge, and therefore was not worth considering at all.
I think that it is a common thing & a change with "habitually" doing certain unlawful acts (Charges c, d, e) and it is supported by evidence of previous acts, indicating a general nature.
Mr. May's attitude also deserves notice.
It is a curious thing that when this kind of case comes before the court, the proceedings generally ...
Page 360
Page 361