14—Under these circumstances, the said George Briarly and his comrades took no further steps with reference to the aforesaid inspection, trusting that the obnoxious regulation would not be enforced as against them, inasmuch as, at the time of enrolment in England, at the swearing-in in Hongkong, and at the interview with the Captain Superintendent, no mention had been made thereof.
236
15. That, on the evening of the 26th day of March, Briarly and his comrades received notice that they were to submit, on the following morning, to the aforesaid inspection, and immediately upon receipt of this notice, the said George Briarly and his comrades expressed their unwillingness to comply with the order, in respect that it was in violation of their contract with the Government,
16.—That, on the morning of the 27th March, the said George Briarly and his comrades, not having presented themselves at the inspection, were summoned into the presence of the Captain Superintendent, and ordered to comply with the terms of the regulation, but this they declined to do, for the reason aforesaid.
17. That therefore the said Captain Superintendent placed the said George Briarly, who had acted as spokesman for his comrades, under arrest, and, after an interval of thirty hours, during which time he was kept in ignorance of the nature of the charge to be made against him, brought him before the Acting Police Magistrate, F. W. Mitchell, Esq., charging him with "insubordination and disobedience of orders," in that he declined to comply with the terms of the aforesaid order.
18—That, at the hearing of the case, the said F. W. Mitchell, Esq., advised the said George Briarly to return to his duty and comply with the regulation, promising, in the event of his doing so, to represent the matter to the Government and to inflict upon him only a very lenient punishment for what technically, he considered, was insubordination.
19. That, acting upon this advice, the said George Briarly did return to his duty and submitted himself to the orders of the Captain Superintendent.
20.—That, on the following day, the aforesaid F. W. Mitchell, Esq., Acting Police Magistrate, inflicted upon the said George Briarly a fine of five dollars.
21. That the Government rescinded the obnoxious regulation.
22.—That the said George Briarly, without having been charged with any further offence, was again summoned into the presence of the Captain Superintendent, fined three days' pay, and informed that he was dismissed from Her Majesty's service, for "insubordination and mutinous conduct.”
23. That the said George Briarly, considering himself guiltless of so grave an offence, therefore made application to the Colonial Government for a free passage home and a certificate of conduct, but he received, from the Acting Colonial Secretary, a refusal to comply therewith.
24. That the said George Briarly, in consequence of his dismissal and the refusal of the Government to grant his aforesaid application, is entirely without resources, and wholly dependent upon the charity of the inhabitants of a Colony situated at a great distance from home.
25.—Your Memorialists humbly submit that a consideration of these facts conclusively proves that the action of the Colonial authorities was not warranted by the circumstances, and is contrary to the principles of British justice; moreover, it is calculated to be prejudicial to the best interests of the Colony, as it will prevent the Government's being able to secure the services of competent and respectable men, to fill up the vacancies which must from time to time occur in the ranks of the Police Force.
Your Memorialists therefore humbly pray that your Lordship will be pleased to direct that such compensation be awarded to the said George Briarly as to your Lordship may seem just and equitable.
D. Kalus
Sylde
David W. Velate
James A.
P. Kypis
James qui Gm lead Itt Cullaly M. Wait Cemplant
Page 240
Page 241
14-Under these circumstances, the said George Briarly and his comrades took no further steps with reference to the aforesaid inspection, trusting that the obnoxious regulation would not be enforced as against them, inasmuch as, at the time of enrolment in England, at the swearing-in in Hongkong, and at the interview with the Captain Superintendent, no mention had been made thereof.
236
15. That, on the ovening of the 26th day of March, Briarly and his comrades received notice that they were to submit, on the following morning, to the aforesaid inspection, and immediately upon receipt of this notice, the said George Briarly and s his comrades expressed their unwillingness to comply with the order, in respect that it was in violation of their contract with the Government,
16.--That, on the morning of the 27th March, the said George Briarly and his comrades, not having presented themselves at the inspection, were summoned into the presence of the Captain Superintendent, and ordered to comply with the terms of, the regulation, but this they declined to do, for the reason aforesaid.
17. That therefore the said Captain Superintendent placed the said George Briarly, who had acted as spokesman for his comrades, under arrest, and, after an interval of thirty hours, during which time he was kept in ignorance of the nature of the charge to be made against him, brought him before the Acting Police Magistrate, F. W. Mitchell, Esq., charging him with "insubordination and disobedience of orders," in that be declined to comply with the terms of the aforesaid order.
18-That, at the hearing of the case, the said F. W. Mitchell, Esq., advised the said George Briarly to return to his duty and comply with the regulation, promising, in the event of his doing so, to represent the matter to the Government and to inflict upon him only a very lenient punishment for what technically, he considered, was -- insubordination.
19.That, acting upon this advice, the said George Briarly did return to his duty and submitted himself to the orders of the Captain Superintendent.
20.---That, on the following day, the aforesaid F. W. Mitchell, Esq., Acting Police Magistrate, inflicted upon the said George Briarly a fine of five dollars.
21. That the Government rescinded the obnoxious regulation.
22.--That the said George Briarly, without having been charged with any further offence, was agaiu summoned into the presence of the Captain Superintendent, fined three days' pay, and informed that he was dismissed from Her Majesty's service, for "insubordination and mutinous conduct.”
23. That the said George Briarly, considering himself guiltless of so grave an offence, therefore made application to the Colonial Government for a free passage home and a certificate of conduct, but he received, from the Acting Colonial Secretary, a refusal to comply therewith.
24.That the said George Briarly, in consequence of his dismissal and the refusal of the Government to grant his aforesaid application, is entirely without resources, aud wholly dependent upon the charity of the inhabitants of a Colony situated at a great
distance from home.
25.--Your Memorialists humbly submit that a consideration of these facts conclu- sively proves that the action of the Colonial authorities was not warranted by the cir- cumstances, and is contrary to the principles of British justice; moreover, it is calculated to be prejudicial to the best interests of the Colony, as it will prevent the Government's being able to secure the services of competent and respectable men, to fill up the vacancies which must from time to time occur in the ranks of the Police Force.
Your Memorialists therefore humbly pray that your Lordship will be pleased to direct that such compensation be awarded to the said George Briarly as to your Lordship may seero just and equitable.
d. Kalus.
sylde
DavidWVelate
James. A
P. Kypis Jamesqui Gm lead Itt Cullaly M. Wait Cemplant
Page 240Page 241
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.