484
( 64 )
men by the Plube Dunbar.
Had I received any such information, I should have applied to the Chief Justice in the matter, for a writ of habeas corpus.
Kan Assam and Lee Atong for murder; it was a case of a fruit hawker murdered in Mr Woods' compound, and thrown over the steps below Mr Lyall's house. Dr Bridges spoke to me about that case. He asked me, had I seen the pri
I did not after I saw the men complain to any one. I soners in the case. I said "No;" then he asked me to go with thought the case must have been sufficiently strong, or the him to the Gaol to see them. One of them was so young, Government would not have pursued such a course with them. and in fact such a child, that he thought it would be any-I do not to this hour know on what ground they were de-. thing but justice to try him on a capital charge. I did go ported, except, as I have said before, that they were spics to the Gaol and saw the two prisoners, and this one, Lee sent by the mandarins. There was no evidence given before Atong, was what we would consider in England about the the Police Court as to their being spies sent by the manda age of 12 or 13. On referring to the depositions I saw very rins, and I do not know whether they were examined by the good reasons to conclude that he was not the guilty party, Executive Council. so I took him out of the dock and made him Queen's evi- dence.
I
I have had no conversation with the Attorney General before he his evidence to the Commission. I am a little
gave deaf, and can't hear distinctly, but apprehend the questions put to me,
I don't exactly recollect whether Mr Caldwell was sitting. on the bench at the time, but the conversation between Mr Caldwell and Mr Anstey was private, and I did not hear it. II remember that something was said about the application..
for bail standing over for a few days, I think Mr Caldwell was on the bench. [Read letter of 19th January, 1857, from Colonial Secretary to Mr Cooper Turner, saying that the bail of 'Ng Ating cannot be sanctioned until the Chinese New Year holidays have passed by.]
Cross-examined,—There was an entry or entries in the books of the Kwong Yik Loong shop, referring to the pur- chase of blue dye and sugar bearing on the second case. certainly think the absence of the evidence to which I allude would weaken the case on the second charge if now tried, for there would be a certain amount of identity lost. think I recollect some entry in the Kwong Yik Loong books shewing a previous connection between that shop and the vendors of the sugar and blue dye, but I cannot say posi- tively about this. There was documentary evidence, which shewed a dealing and an underhand dealing, on that parti- eular day succeeding the piracy, from about early in the morning till about 2 or 3 in the afternoon, and the absence of that documentary evidence would weaken the case if tried now.
GEORGE COOPER TURNER,-Called and examined. I recollect two clients of mine, Chinese traders 'Ng Aling and Chea Mun-kwong, being seized and thrown into Gaol under the Deportation Ordinance, in January 1857. They were arrested under the warrant of Mr Caldwell, I believe. I applied to Mr Anstey, then sitting as Magistrate, for their liberation on bail. I spoke to him first privately on the sub- ject, and then made a formal application. He did not say whether he would grant the application when I applied to him privately. When I applied formally at the Police Court, I do not remember whether Mr Caldwell was present or not. My application was refused, in consequence of the information Mr Caldwell had given the Government on the question. I think Mr Anstey at the time told me he refused the bail on this account.
I was present and made the application. The prisoners were not brought into the court; the bail rested entirely with the Government. I then wrote to the Colonial Secretary, and had a letter leading me to believe that bail would be granted. I heard no more, but two or three days after I saw the two men being marched down for deportation by the Phoebe Dunbar. I do not recollect any one stating to Mr Anstey that they were very bad characters, and had been guilty of some offence without specifying what, when I applied for bail. I had no intimation from any quarter at all that it was intended to deport these
It is very likely that Mr Caldwell opposed the bail in this private conversation, although I did not hear him. Mr Caldwell is in the habit of frequently speaking to the Magis trate on the bench. I do not think I informed the Attorney General that the prisoners had been deported.
I cannot give an opinion whether there were any persons, other than Mr May, attached to the Police Department, capable of conducting the prosecution of Ma-chow Wong to a successful issue; nor as to what would have been the fate of the case, had not Mr May taken an interest in seeing the inquiry properly conducted.
The perusal of my letter of 14th January, 1857, to the Acting Colonial Secretary, applying for bail for 'Ng Kamting, does not enable me to add anything to what I have already stated, except that there is difference in the name.
WILLIAM THOMAS BRIDGES,-Recalled at his own request, to correct part of his evidence given on the 29th ultimo, and also to make a statement in answer to some remarks made by the Attorney General.
[The Chairman announced that cross-examination would be allowed on Dr Bridges's corrections of his evidence ; but that, although his statement and any answer to it on the part of the Attorney General would be received, no cross-exami- nation would be allowed on either of their statements.}
I believe that I stated that Ma-chow Wong's books dod papers were referred for examination to Messrs Caldwell and fongan, previous to the appearance of the article in the China Mail. Such was my impression, but I find that I was ander error, and that the reference was made after the
( 65 )
appearance of the article, and most probably in consequence His Excellency the Governor, stated to him what I had of it. I may state also, that the letter requesting the exami- heard, and asked him if anything of the kind had taken nation, was written by the Clerk of Councils, and this is pro- place. His Excellency stated, that he should take no official bably the reason of the fact escaping my mind.
notice of anything which occurred before the Commis- sion until it had concluded its labours; but he assured me that he had made no such statement, and added that it
+
I was Acting Attorney General, from the 28th February, 1852, to 13th February, 1853; and from 13th April, 1854, to the 15th January, 1856, with the exception of one would have been impossible for him to have appointed me week. I cannot say if I communicated with any one regard- Acting Colonial Secretary if he had done so. Had the ing my report to Mr Secretary Labouchere, recommending matter remained there, I should have been content to pass the establishment of a Thuggee police system, and the this matter by, as one of those aberrations from the truth placing Mr Caldwell at the head of it. I have no doubt to which the Attorney General is continually liable; but I told somebody of it. 1 was requested by Mr Labou- when I found that the Commission had printed this state- chere officially to make this report. I had a long interview] ment, I deemed it necessary for my own defence, and also with Mr Labouchere and Mr Ball, regarding the different for the instruction of the Commission as to the weight to be questions connected with the colony, and I had a letter given to any statement of the Attorney General, to go further from Mr Elliott requesting me to put what I said to Mr in to the matter. I turned up from the records of the office Labouchere in writing, which I did, and to which I had an official letter written to me on the 5th of January, 1856 an answer thanking me for it. I decline to answer the] I left the colony on the 15th January, 1856. That letter is question whether I have any knowledge theoretical or from Mr Mercer, the then Colonial Secretary, as to the practical of that kind of police. I decline to answer formal part of it; but as to the substantial part is in the what I know about it. If the Commission sits on the sub- Governor's own handwriting, and is to the effect,-
ject, I shall be happy to give them the information I have
got.
I decline to answer whether it was to be introduced here with or without modifications. I don't know that my suggestion was refused.
It has not been adopted. No ques- tion arose as to Mr Caldwell's antecedents making him unfit for such high office. I do not know whether I have kept the letter from the Colonial Office or not. I was about to be married at the time I received it, and had plenty of other things to think about.
6th January, 1850.
SIR, In acknowledging your letter of the 1st instant, I am directed to inform you, that the nomination by H. M's. Government of Mr Anstey to by the Secretary of State. H. E. the Governor directs me to express to the office of Attorney General of this colony, has been officially announced
you his high sense of the zeal and ability with which you have discharged the duties imposed on you, while exercising the important functions of Attorney General of Hongkong.
(Signed) W. T. MERCER.
I then turned up a letter from Mr Mercer, in which he Cross-examined, I do mean the Commission to understand,; states he was unwilling to express himself the Governor's that Mr Mongan was not informed at that meeting, or any opinion, and therefore left it to His Excellency to write in other meeting of the Executive Council, of the authority his own hand. I also lay in before the Commission, letters Mr May's memoranda,-on which that statement in the from the Lieutenant Governor, from Admiral Stirling, and a China Mail was made, and that he was not examined on those letter presented to me on the 14th January, and signed by memoranda. I have never had anything to say to any of the the greater portion of this community, expressing their opi- papers, beyond the conversation with Mr Mongan. The papers nion of my conduct during the five years I had been in this regarding the Ma-chow Wong and Beaver case were in the colony. I should never have shewn these documents to any- hands of the Clerk of Councils, and the Ma-chow Wong body, but it is only in a case like this I am compelled to bring papers were in the hands of Mr Mongan, who made an them forward, considering that it was impossible His Ex- application as to what was to be done with them. That is cellency the Governor could have forgotten the official letter, the only I reason I can give why the one set was destroyed
and the other not.
not three weeks old, or could have been unaware of the opi- nion in which I was held by my fellow servants, and by the community at large. I wish to state, that I do not con- sider it to be a question of credibility between His Excellency the Governor and the Attorney General, but that I believe
I now proceed to my statement. I happened accidentally to come in here on the 28th of June, and I heard the Attorney General state that within two days after his arrival, therefore on the 2d February, 1856, His Excel- the statement to be knowingly made, with the deliberate leney the Governor begged him to make it his business intention to attempt to injure me. I have also to state, that/ to bring to light, and if necessary to punish, the malprac when I returned to this colony, Mr Anstey shewed no back- tices of which he complained.
Mr Anstey begged to wardness in making my acquaintance; he in no way behaved specify in particular to the Commission the malpractices toward me as a person who had been guilty of malpractices, of the Police, and of his
own department of Attorney and that, considering his line of conduct towards me recently, General. Now, as I was the only officer who had acted it is almost impossible, that had so important a charge been Attorney General with Sir John Bowring, those mal-made against me by the Governor, he would not have practices, if any, must have been mine. I went in to brought it forward long ago. I wish merely to add with
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.