questing you to discontinus it, and there was some correspondence between us on the subject. An I to understand you to swear on your oath that I wrote you a letter?You wrote to my olerk declining to discontinue supplying the paper until you were requested to do so by the Governor or the Colonial Secretary; it was not written to me personally.
You are aware of course that it has been my duty frequently
Mr. Franois--Duty!
Defendant You will have your opportunity of making any remarks you please presently, Mr. Francis. To witness: You are aware that I bave considered it my duty frequently to write adverse criticisms upon your public nots ?
Witness-I do not know what you may cou. sider it your duty to write, but I know that you have systematically slandered me for mouths past.
Defendant-That is not the point. Witness-It is the point. Defendant-Have I criticised your public acts ?
Witness-You have.
not often adversely
Have I ever praised what you have done - As I never read your paper I cannot say.
You are aware it is the daty of every paper to fearlessly_criticise the public aots of say public officer P-I am,
You instructat your clerk to write to me last January Yes.
Is this the letter P-I have never seen the lot- ter; I only gave my clerk instructions, I do not know what he wrote.
The defendant then read the latter as follows: "I am directed by the Surveyor-General to inform you that he desires to discontinue the subscription of this department to your paper, and will be glad if you will favour this office with your account at your earliest convenience.-I remain, &o.,
WILLIAM GOULBOURNE,
The defendant-Is that the substance of Four instructiona?
Witness-It is.
And you remember receiving a reply to it P- I remember my clerk told me you declined to discontinue it.
I will read you the letter.
The defendant read as follows-
Hongkong Telegraph Office, Hongkong, 4th January, 1883.
W. Goulbourne, Esq.,
SIR,-In reply to your letter just received, will you be good enough to inform the Hon. the Surveyor- General that we have received fustrnctions from the Colonial Secretary to supply the Surveyor-General's Department daily with a copy of the Hongkong Tele- graph and that we shall continue to do so until the order in countermauded either by Dr. Stewart or his Excellency the Administrator.-I am, &c.,
R. FRASER-SMITE. Examination continned-Were you never criticised in the Hongkong Telegraph before the 4th January.
Witness-I believe I have been; I believe I have been systematically libelled by the Hong. kong Telegraph, but I cannot give dates.
On the receipt of that letter by Mr. Goul bourne I believe you addressed a letter to the Colonial Secretary ?—I did.
You remember what you said F-Perfectly. Will you repeat it for the benefit of the jury? -I consider my communications to the Co. lonial Secretary are privileged, and do not con seru you in any way whatever.
Did you state that I was a convicted criminal pursuing my abandoned onroer ?—I decline to give you say answer on that point.
Defendant-We will have the latter produced,
so it does not matter. Will you give the reason why you ordered the paper to be discontinued when it was ordered to be supplied by the Co. louial Secretary?
Witness Because I did not consider it re- spectable.
Why P-Every man is entitled to his opinion; and that was my opinion.
I asked you the reason.
Was it not because
your acts were severely criticised P-I formed the opinion then, and I have seen no reason to alter that opinion.
Why, you bave just said you never see the paper. No, but some of its contents are often repeated to me.
Was it not because of an article severely ori- ticisin your public sets ?-It was not.
Will you be good enough to inform the jury as to the custom of your department in carrying ont contracts?
Mr. Francis objected to the question on the ground that it was not now competent for the defendant to go into the truth or falsehood of the alleged libal.
The defendant said he was not going into that question, but he would only endeavour to show he was not actuated by malice and that he had good grounds for advocating an investigation into certain matters.
His Lordship sail the defendant was entitled to go into that as Mr. Francis had made malios one of the strings of his bow. It would be his duty here. after to tell the jury how far they were to oon- sider the question of malice.
Mr. Price then, in answer to the defendant's examination, said that when public works were to be undertaken there were two courses which were followed-oue was to advertise for tenders in the Government Gazette, and to send ronud oiroulars to the principal contractors, or to have the work done by measurement in accordanos with a schedule of prices in the Government Offices. In all workstenders were not advertised for in the Government Gazette; it was not necessary, but io large works, such as thatat Causeway Bay, or the Observatory, it was the invariable rule to advertise for tenders unless there was some special reason against it. The whole thing was governed by the possibility of ascertaining the cost of say work beforehand. The acceptance of any con- trast rested with the Governor, but he could not say that he had no responsibility with respect to them, since he sent his report upon the tenders to His Excellency, who might, perhaps, be in- fluenced by it. A tender accepted without competition would not be an irregularity, as a great many contracts were given without any competition. That was only done where the price of the contract was below the Govern- ment scale already mentioned and would not be given otherwise. There was no truth in the paragraph the defendant had quoted from the China Mail as to the Govern ment paying 50 percent, more for their work than private individuals. A great many public con. tracts were given without competition every day. The laying of the foundation of the new Lunatio Asylum had been so given to Mr. Chan Kim. The work was to be done by measurement. The new mortuary at Shek Tong Tani was a parallel nase, but it was not a fact that the prices paid for these works were much above their actual vaine,
Spacifestions were prepared for the whole of them. There was nothing to prevent any respectable contractor from doing the work, providing that he did it socording to the schedule, and gave certain guarantees. The work for the Observatory was put out to public competition, Sun Shing being the successful contractor.
Ilis Lordship said he did not see how it would avail the defendant to go into these matters an- less be showed that ho was aware of them at the time he wrote the article in question,
The defendant said he was aware of them at the time; the contracts were settled in 1882.
Tis Lordship said he did not see what use the defendant wished to make of them in his defence.
The defendant said he wished to show that he was not actuated by malice, but that he had acted on good grounds.
His Lordship said he was not inclined to check the examination unless an objection was raised.
Mr. Francis--I am quite prepared to give the defendant as mach rope as he needs, my Lord; he will only make one use of it.
The Defendant-My only object is to elicit the truth.
Mr. Francis-And thereby hang yourself, The defendant-If I hang myself that is my affair.
Examination continued-It was hardly likely that when the invitation for the tenders was is- sued, it was intimated that the work would have to be done within four months, bat witness could not remember whether it was stated now, as it was published nearly a year ago.
By Mr. Franois-Witness was not in the colony, but was away on leave when the article appeared in the Telegraph as to the payment of contractors, alluded to by the defendant.
Dr. Stewart was then called, and in answer to the defendant, he said-I am acting for the Colonial Secretary at present. I have been zabpensed to produce cretain documents. I produce a letter dated January 8th, 1883, from the Surveyor-General to the acting Colonial Secretary.
57
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.