CO129-072 - Indviduals - 1858 — Page 126

viz: the tenor of

Protests against the

illegal and arbitrary acts of the body; which

"Guilty" a mesh before, and

"Guilty" those Protests against whose Verdict of

had found

for me

against

lodged.

on

me

Sir E.

in the

As I am going to address is 2. B. Lytton this subject, I request to be informed whether the above facts, and the alleged unanimity of the Council in my regard, not communicated to that passer by Excellency's permission.

I have the.

(signed) T. (monometrratry Aly.

To the Honorable the Acting Colonial Secretary.

500

(Copy

Colonial Secretary's Office Victoria Hong Kong 20th October 1858.

I have laid before the Governor your letter of the day, and have received instructions, from His Excellency merely to acknowledge its receipt and to decline further correspondence on the subject of your suspension until the pleasure of Her Majesty's Government be known.

I have the.

(Signed) W. J. Bridge.

Acting Colonial Secretary.

F.C. Anstey Esqre

&c. &c. &c.

(The two newspapers referred to in this letter to the Secretary of State I and II

II.

The China Mail.

HONGKONG. THURSDAY, 12TH AUGUST, 1858.

WE understand that a despatch from Sir Edward B. Lytton, the new Colonial Secretary, very complimentary to De Bridges, has been addressed to the Governor; and at a time when so determined a disposition has been manifested to depreciate the services of a valuable officer, it must be a satisfaction for him to know that these services are properly valued in the highest quarters.

The China Mail.

HONGKONG. THURSDAY, 19TH AUGUST, 1858.

By rule, it was inevitable that many idle and unfounded reports of his conduct should be in circulation. He had himself, by his admitted connection with Ma-chow Wong, given ground for opinions unfavourable to his character. Hence when public enquiry was made regarding other charges, he stood very much in the position of a man "condemned already," and in imminent danger of dying the official death. Though any Chinese might be afraid to bear witness against him, he must have made not a few enemies among them; and some interpreters, especially, on whom he had acted as a check, were eager for his ruin. Though not suspended from office during the inquiry, (as he ought to have been, if possible, but along with his accusers,) the protection of his position and name was weakened by the previous conviction of his ally Ma-chow Wong, and by he himself being publicly prosecuted (for such was virtually and palpably the fact) by two of the most influential officers of Government, while any support he may have received from other of its members, was entirely private. In the person of Mr May, he had not merely the Superintendent of Police—always a formidable opponent—but also that most dangerous and bitter of all enemies, an old friend, who had carefully treasured up careless remarks, which might have a suspicious look, made in the confidence of private conversation years before. If Mr May had had the Caldwell Commission in view all his life, he could hardly have been better prepared than he was to go into matters on which it was vastly easier for a wary and prepared man to raise charges than for the accused person, however innocent, to find, after the lapse of time, any means of refutation. While refusing to take the responsibility of being accuser, Mr Anstey fulfilled that function with the utmost zeal, bringing all his formidable acumen and intellect to bear on the unworthy task of crushing Mr Caldwell, against whom he had prematurely committed himself, and through whom he might strike at higher game. It is true that Mr Anstey's over-zeal was in some respects favourable to the accused, but we should like to see the man who, in his own case, would accept such an advantage as a set-off against having such a foe.

A short time ago, we heard some talk of a petition being got up against the suspension of Mr Anstey, and in this connection there were freely used the names of parties, who, we felt sure, would never dream of mixing themselves up with such an affair, after they had carefully perused the evidence which came before the Caldwell Commission. There was, we understand, but one opinion in the Executive Council as to the necessity of this step, and the step was taken on a variety

of grounds. Among these was one on which the public is not, and cannot expect at present, to be competent judge—namely, the replies made by Mr Anstey to the Council's requests for an explanation of his speeches before the Commission. Further, these speeches of his, when some incorrect reports appeared in local papers—were so insulting to the Governor and the Colonial Secretary, that the Government would only have brought upon itself universal contempt had it allowed Mr Anstey to remain in office. His conduct towards Mr Caldwell—inexcusable though that was—was only one, and a subsidiary one, among the many grounds for his suspension. Interference with the action of the Executive in this matter, will only bring confusion on those who attempt it; and it is plain, on general grounds, that Mr Anstey is a man who ought to fight with the world, the flesh, and the devil, from an independent stand-point, and that he would enjoy much greater freedom and comfort in doing so, than from attempting any impossible compromise with the necessities of office. We hope and believe that a public career which commenced with impeaching the Foreign Minister of England, will not ignominiously end with vainly attempting to extinguish the Registrar General of Hongkong; but we see clearly, that to regain his pristine glory, Mr Anstey must ascend from the low valley of office, and mount a Pisgah height, from whence he may pour forth his sublime denunciations on a wicked and corrupt generation. Truly Hongkong has been favoured among colonies; the disinterested Ilocrate has walked our streets; the voice of Anstey has been heard crying in the moral wilderness; and one—"the late lamented W. M. Robinet"—has appeared from the dead, and, (fulfilling an old prediction,) instead of listening to him, we have cast him into prison!

DURING the enquiry into his conduct which has now been concluded, Mr Caldwell was placed in peculiarly trying circumstances, and underwent a more severe ordeal than we should like to see any friend of ours go through. The Government being so entirely dependent upon him in its relation to the Chinese residents, he was necessarily exposed to grave suspicions; and the Chinese being so accustomed to regard corruption as inseparable

Not a few more considerations might be brought to show, that Mr Caldwell stood at a great disadvantage, and we refer to this matter because the Commission has complained in its report "of the reluctance of witnesses to give evidence."

On justice, let it be remembered that this reluctance, or apparent reluctance, is capable of various explanations, and that (they believe and can declare in private) usually arises from men's ideas of what is just, being so often unable to stand the light of a public court. Had the mass of evidence brought against Mr Caldwell given token of any desire to shield him—had it even been brought with ordinary caution and accuracy, then, possibly, the "reluctance" might have been explained against him. But how different is the state of the case! The Chinese witnesses showed no more reluctance and untruthfulness than they always do, and only the European witnesses were important. Statement after statement was made utterly damnatory of Mr Caldwell, which, either on cross-examination or on the witnesses' own correction, crumbled down into harmless insignificant facts or opinions. The conduct of the prosecutors was in this respect highly disgraceful, and we wonder the Commission has made no remark upon it, but they erred along with a large company. To illustrate: it was to be expected that the Assistant Magistrate would not, without being sure of his ground, make statements showing that Mr Caldwell ought to have been brought before the Supreme Court three years ago, and yet Mr Mitchell

125