CO129-192 - Governor Hennessy - 1881 [1-4] — Page 409

UOT

(8)

bere in a day or two. To what time do may consult these notes, or if he saw any- you ask that the case be now adjourned? body else taking notes we may bring them

Mr Brereton: If the case is to be again remanded, I must ask that the evidence of Mr Ryrie be taken now. He way be going away to Japan, indeed his intention is to go to-morrow.

in. But I don't think you can examine him in this manner.

Mr Johnson: You cannot take a nowS-

paper report and ask a casual hearer to swear to it in this way.

Mr Brereton: I can produce the news- paper reporter.

Mr Johnson: What is this evidence ? Mr Brereton: It is evidence that may become most pertinent to the case if your The Magistrate: That is the proper way Worship does not hold as I believe there to prove the accuracy of the report. will be sufficient reason adduced before Mr Brereton: I simply wanted the wit- you for your holding that there is absoness to speak generally as to his belief in lutely nothing in the letter in the shape of the accuracy of this report and to say what a libel. This point is most pertinent to be understood by it. I cannot ask witness the case, that the letter in which it was to repeat what Mr Nelson said on that complained a libel on the complainent is occasion, on the 23rd of Feb.

Did you embodied, was provoked by an attack made ever know of any prodigy who recollected by Mr Nelson on Mr Pitman in the Cham the words of a whole speech some throo ber of Commerce. This is a point not only months after it was delivered? in mitigation of punishment," but it is an answer to the prosecution altogether. I have a case here exactly similar. There was a gross libel, a very gross libel, but the question of provocation came in. I have the Queen's Bench case here.

The Magistrate: I do not see there can be any objection to taking Mr Ryrie's evidence if it is on a material point and if he is going away from Hongkong.

Mr Johnson: I have no objection.

HON. P. RYKIE'S EVIDENCE,

Mr P. Ryrie was then sworn. The fol lowing is his examination-in-chief by Mr Brereton, question and answer:

You are a merchant and a member of the Chamber of Commerce of Hongkong?

I atd.

The annual meeting of the Chamber of Commerce took place on the 23rd February last ?-On the 23rd February.

You were present on that occasion 7-1

was.

Mr. Brereton: I shall read you a short speech that was made on that occasion from the official report, and you can say whether the report is correct, whether you remember that speech being made.

Mr Johnson: I object to that being done. Mr Brereton, to witness: You heard Mr Nelson make a speech that day?

Witness: Yes.

The Magistrate: What is that you are to quote from?

Mr Brereton: It is the report published by authority. It is entitled "Report of the Committee of the Hongkong General Chamber of Commerce for the year ending 81st December 1879, presonted to the members at the annual meeting held on the 28rd February, 1880." It is the official report; Mr Ryrie knows that because he is one of the members of the Committee.

Mr Johnson: You will note my objee- tion, your Worship.

The Magistrate: I have done so.

Mr Ryrie's examination resumed :—-Yon are a member of the Committee of the Chamber of Commeres ?— I am.

You are able to say that this is the official report (the Chamber "book" pro- duced) of the Chamber of Commerce ?--- Yes.

Mr Nelson is a member of the Chamber too ?-Hc is Vice-President.

You will listen to the following para- graph which I read from the "oficial report --

Mr Nelson.In the absence of any communication from the Government on the subject, the Chamber is hardly entitled to consider that the question is before them. I learn from Chinese sources that the Memorial which was presented the other day was got up by a gentleman rather well known in the Colony, who is in the employ of the Japanese Government, and who is more or less mixed up with the Oplum Farm and other matters in the Mr Johnson: I object to his memory: Colony, and who is on very intimate and being refreshed in any such way. Let the friendly terms with the bead of the Go- witness tell us what he knows, and not vernment in Hongkong, Now bearing in accept another man's version.

mind the manner in which equally sponta-

Mr Johnson: Now ask the witness what Mr Nelson said.

Mr Brereton: I propose to read this extract to refresh his memory.

The Magistrate: If the witness made any neous expressions of opinion on other notes himself of what Mr Nelson said, he¦ matters have been utilised is the Colony,

(9)

Never soon it ?-Never.

You are quite ignorant of its contents? Except so far as I have heard of them at the Club,

I think one may justly come to the con. Cross-examined by Mr Johnson: I think clusion something is to be done in this you have seen this letter containing the matter, and I think, in the absence of any libels complained of before, have you not ? communication from the Government, it is I have not. not unbecoming on the part of the Chamber to invite some little amount of confidence in the matter, supposing anything is being done. I suggest the Secretary put him- self in communication with the Govern- ment and make an inquiry whether any-I thing is being done."

When did you first know anything was Now, Mr Ryrie, is that a correct report going to be sent?-I did not know anything of what Mr Nelson said on that occasion? whatever about something going to be sent. I heard that there was going to be

It is.

Did you know when it was written ?---- did not.

Can you say from your knowledge of an action for libel said to "have been public business and general experience of published by Mr Pitman concerning Mr the Colony to whom that speech applied? Nelson. I don't know if it is evidence, Who is this gentleman said to be in the but I said at the time that my impression eraploy of the Japanese Government and was that the libel was all the other way. so intimate with the Governor ?--I un- Mr Johnson: Oh, of course. derstood it to be Mr Pitman; moreover The case at this point was adjourned till that it was intended to point to Mr Pitman. Friday, whon, it being Mr Creagh's off-day I suppose you are able to say that it was so far as the routine Magisterial work is pretty generally known by those present concerned, he said he could be at the dis- that it was a reference to Mr Pitman ?-posal of the parties all day.

All the gentlemen who spoke with me after- wards agreed that it was Mr Pitraan who was referred to, and that it could be no one eise

Now, I would ask you what construction

FOURTH DAY.

Friday, April 28.

The case came on again to day.

did you put upon that speech 7-My con- THE FINAL HEARING IN THE POLICE COURT: struction is that it was an imputation on THE ACCUSED COMMITTED TO THE Mr Pitman that he was getting a memorial

SESSIONS. drawn up for purposes of his own or such purposes as suited him, and moreover it The prosecution was now conducted by struck me that it was an imputation upon T. C. Hayllar, Q.O., instructed by Mr A. the Executive--which I considered very B. Johnson, of Messrs Sharp, Toller and wrong that it could be influenced by such | Johnson; and the defendant was now re- a statement. That is simply my opinion presented by Mr J. J. Francis, instructed of it, of course.

by Mr Brereton, of Mesars Brereton and Wotton.

37

That the pettition was a spurious one ?- That was the impression it presented to ME HAYLLAR'S CASE FOR THE PROSECUTION. my mind.

Mr Hayllar said he appeared for the That the petition for the legalisation of complainant, Mr Nelson. This was a very the Japanese yen in this Colony was not a painful osso. His client was made the voluntary bona fide petition from those who subject of a letter, which, he thought very sigued it? That was, to my mind, the im- naturally, exasperated him and brought pression the speech was calculated and him before His Worship really to apply, as intended to produce. That it was a "got- much on public as on private grounds, up" affair altogether. He used the word that the gentleman who wrote it be com

got-up. He said it was a "got-up"mitted for trial for publishing a false and petition.

malicious libel knowing it to be false. The Magistrate: That it was a sham The matter had been before His Worship petition?

three or four times; he (Counsel) had had an opportunity of reading from the newspa pors bere, the China Mail and the Daily Press, the reports of the proceedings, by which he saw that a letter which his sido had been called upon to produce had been mentioned. His client did not feel him. self in a position to accept the suggestion contained in this letter, having regard to the whole circumstances of the case and

Witness: Yes.

Mr Brereton: The meaning of "got-up" we all know,

The Magistrate: You understood from what Mr Nelson said that the defendant in this case had got up a sham petition res pecting the legalisation of the Japanese yen in this Colony?

Witness: Yes. That is it.

401