CO129-288 - Public Offices & Others - 1898 — Page 307

ΤΟ

Appendix.

206

300

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN, M.P.,

Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Colonial Affaire, Downing Street, Loudon, S.W.

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF UTTER SINGHI, OF No. 12, HOLLYWOOD ROAD, VICTORIA, HONGKONG. LATE SERGEANT-MAJOR IN THE POLICE FORCE OF THAT COLONY

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWECH --

1.-Your Petitioner had the honour to address a representation to you, Right Honourable Sir, in Septeraber last, with regard to bis dismissal from the Police Force of this Colony-after having served therein for eighteen years-un the alleged ground that your Petitioner was implicated in some money- leuding transactions, such transactions being against the Regulations of the Force.

2.-Your Petitioner prayed for a review of the considerations most respectfully advanced therein against the condemnation that bad been inflicted upon him without anything like fair opportunities being vouchsafed to him to plead not guilty, and to put in bis just defence in support of his plea. Your Petitioner has been informed that his prayer for a redress has not been acceded to.

3.----Your Petitioner, therefore, ventures to approach you with a respectful entrenty that you may be pleased to review the further considerations advanced in this communication in testiaony of his innocence, and your Petitioner submits that these further considerations have cropped up owing to certain other allegatious imputed to him with reference to an inquiry instituted on the 1st day of October, 1897, at the Victoria Gaol by the Honourable The Captain Superintendent of Police as to a charge alleged against him by one Tse Leung of his having paid to your Petitioner the money of a Gambling House in 1896.

4. As to the methods of the inquirios instituted—as in the matter of the alleged implication in money-lending, so in that of money-receiving--your Petitioner has refrained in his previous representa- tion from animadverting on the short notice-almost no notice having been served on him by the Honourable Captain Suparintendent that he would be put on his defence for the said allegations. Petitioner in both cases was called upon at a moment's notice to answer to the charges, after the Captain Superintendent had hoard previously and in camerâ the evidences of interested parties, and not only that, but any fair questioning or cross-questioning as what might naturally very poorly occur to a person put on his defence at a moment's notion of those witnesses was even rarely allowed, and against the rules and methods observed und observable in all the British Courts the Honourable the Caprain Superintendent placed kimself against him on the occasion of the inquiries in the triple position of a prosecutor, juuy and judge, and the urloption of this constitution of the Trinity in Unity,” if Petitioner may be allowed the use of the expression, shut of all legitimate means of the Petitioner to secure a hair and an unbiased investigation, and to exculpate himself thoroughly from the imputacions attempted to fusten on him.

inquiry

5.--- "Though deprived of those opportunities, it has overthorless strongly cop in the first as to mong-louding, that one of the principal witnesses against the Petitionor," By Da Rocha, to whom the money was alleged to have been lont, when questioned by the Donourable Captain Superintendent in Petitioner's presence as to his having received any money from your Petitioner, subverted his story altogether, and denied that he had ever nå all reecived any money from the Petitioner, and he told a radically different story from that which he told under thui officer's previous inquiry in Pelitioner's absence, so much so that the Captair Superintenden. was not slow on that occasion to tax Da Rocha severely Zor thus prevaricating. This act could well be corroborated by the Honourable Captain Superintendent, and under the circumstances your Petitioner submits that such deliberate shuffhug of statements, ouce made unde the indirectly encrcive prosence of the Captain Superintendent, and at another time when confronted with Petitioner, if placed before a jury would at once entitle Petitioner to the verdict of "Not Guilty."