4
ते
302
5
SIR,
A
No. 19. HOLLywood Road,
Hovawong, 2nd November, 1897.
With reference to my Petition to the Right Honourable Mr. J. CuAMBERLAIN, M.P., Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Colonial Affairs, dated the 13th September last, and further with reference to an inquiry instituted on the first day of October, 1897, at the Victoria Onol by the Honourable Chptain Saperintendent of Police, us to a charge alleged against me by one Tse Leung of his having paid to No, 586, that is to me, in my oficial capacity of “Indian Tuspector **in the Hongkong Police Force the money of a Gambling Blouse last year, I have now the honour, most respectfully to forward with this for the due consideration of His Excelleney the Governor my Statutory Declaration made before Mr. A. P. Stokes, a notury public of this Colony, denying that I have over vereived any money by way of bribe from anybody in this Colony, I have also the honour to further onclose with this a Statutory Declaration made before the said notary public by Mr. William Stautou, late Tuspector in the Hongkong Police Force, with reference to the deposition. verily believed to have been given--by the very same person, The Leung, as the one who was deponent against, me--at au inquiry held on the 24th and 25th days of August, last by the Honourable Captain Superintendent and Mr. Dennys, Crown Solicitor, in connection with certain charges alleged against Mr. Stanton of not discovering and reporting a guabling houzy at. No. 2, Wa Lawe, Victoria, in this Colony.
Mr. Stanton in his declaration states on oath that the Chizaman The Jaung at the aforesaid inquiry in August last made a diunctrically opposed statement to the one he made in the inquiry held against me, and that in that previous inquiry, whilst under cross-exmumination by Mr. Simaton, be stated that he and never received any monics from gamblers or gambling houses for the purpose of paying the same to any of the Indian Poltsamen in the Hongkong Police Force, Jus to quote the words of Mr. Stanton's declaration :---“He," that is Tee Loung, "further stated to me that he had uevər paid any monies to such Indian Policemen by way of bribe. I pressed him in cross-examination sud in answer to my questions he stated that he had never paid any montes by way of bribes to any members of the Hongkong Police Force. He further siated that if any person had so informed we (this Deponent) such information would be false and untrue.”
As this port of the daposition of Tao Loung is in fagrant and entire contradiction to that given by him in my case, I most respectfully submit that the inference cannot be gainsaid then Tee Leang had been, to say the least of it, deliberately felsifying himself before the Honourable Captain Superintendent in the inquiry held against 100, and as I verily believe that the evidences given by the said Tee Loung at both the inquiries have bevo recorded by the IIonourable Captain Superintendent, the information of the contradiction as pointed out above, His Excellency the Governor will be pleased to call for, with a view to give niequate and equitable consideration to any report sent or to be sent by the Honourable Captain Superintendent of the inquiry heki against me, and I also pray and extreat that if papers relating to the alleged charge against nu are sent to the Right Honourable the Colonial Secretary, the enclosed Statutory Declarations, in justive to oue who was an humble servant of the Crown for eighteen years, His Excellency the Governor will be pleased also to send to the Right Honourable Gentleman.
1 have the housour to be,
To
THE HONOURABLE
J. H. STEWART LOCKHART,
COLONIAL SECRETARY, HONGKONG,
TO ALL TO WHOM THESH PRESENTS SILALL COMF—
B
Sir.
Your most obedient servant,
UTTER SINGH,
LATE INDIAN SERGEANT-MAJOR
HONGKONG POLICE FORCE.
I, Alfred Parker Stokes, Notary Public, duly authorised admitted and sworn, residing and practising at Victoria, in the Island and • Colony of Hongkong, Do Henny Chartry ikat I was present on the first day of November instant in my office, No. 2 Queen's Road Control, and did then and there see Otter Singh, the person nured in the annexed Stamtory Declaration duly sign and declare before me the maid Statutory Declaration through the interpretation of Hornuusjce Ruttonjos, of Victoria, oforesaid, who was present at the game time, and that the said Пormiajes Ruttonjee did duly declare beibre we that he had truly, distinctly and audibly interpreted the contents of the said Statutory Declamation to the said Uitter Singh, and that he would truly and faithfully interpret the declaration about to be administered unto the said Utter Singh. AND JALAN CERTIFY that the name or sigunture "Otter Singh" subscribed to the said Statutory Declaration is of the proper handwritting of the said Utter Singh, AND THAT the name or signature "A. P. Stokes" aubscribed thereto as the notary public before who the said Statutory Declaration was made is of the proper handwriting of me, the said Notary.
IN TESTIMONY whereot I have hereunto subscribed my unme and affixed my anal of office this first day of November, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven.
A. P. STOKES,
NOTARY PUBLIg, Hovokose,
In the matter of the Humble Petition of Utter Singht, of No. 12, Hollywood Road, Victoria, Hunting, Sergeant Major
in the Police Force of that Colony, presented to the Right Honourable Mr. J. Chamberlain, M.P., Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Colonial Affairs, Downing Street, London, 27, on the Thirteenth day of September, 1997, and
In the matter of the Statutory Declarations.
I, Utter Singh. of 19, Hollywood Rond, formerly of No. 12, Hollywood Road, Victoria, in the long of Hongkong, Late Sergeam-Major in the Poline Fores of that Colony, de solemnly and sincerely declare and say as follows:-
1.---On the 1st day of October, 1897, The Honourable Francis Henry May, C.M.C., Capté, Superintendent of Police, directed me to attend before kin at Victoria Gael on the same day at 4 e.si., and I attended arœlingly.
2---The Cyanin Superintendent, of Polleo, who is at the prescut time also Superintendent Victoria Gaol, first confronted mic with a Chinaman, a Pensioner dressed in prison clothes, and who I do not know, and sarber the first time on the day in question. This man was asked by the Captain Superintendent of Police through an Interaster to read a paper which was written in the Chinese language. He road out in Chinese, which was interpreted by Interpreter to the Captaia Superintendent of Police, the figures 572 and 586.
*$1.56."
3.-The Captain Superintendent of Police further asked him "What else was written on the par?" And he replied
4-On being asked what the figures 372 and 386 meant, he replied "These are the number of certain Indian policemen,” and fluk the last itero, viz., §1.55 weant the sum paid to one The Leung for payment to thes policemen, Nos. 572 and US6.
5.The Captain Superintendent of Police asked, "To whom did you give these sums?" and the Chinaman replied Tee Loung ted to nowe and ask me for money."
יו
€--- The Chprain Superintendent of Police than asked the Chinumum for what purpose was this money given? And
he replied, "They (meaning Policencu Nos. 572 and 586) may have asked Tse Loung for it, but I do u know as to thie."
7-Ile was then asked. Is there anyone here prezent who you would recognise as No. 5881" and the Chinaman replied "No."
¿
5.--After this the Chaptain Superintendent of Police asked me if I wished to ask this Chivasan any question. I replied "No, I do not wish to ask this man avy question.”
9.-This Chinaman was then told to go away and another Chinaman, who was called The Leug by the Interpreter, was called forward.
10.--The Chinaman Tee Leung whilst the deposition of the before-mentioned Chinaman was being taken was alone in an adjoining reora the door of which room was not closed and no one was watching or looking after him.
11-He way or may not have overheard the statement made by the first witness.
12. This man was called forward and answored to the name of The Loung-
18. The Captain Superintendent of Police shewed in the same papers as was shewn to the first witness, and asked
him to read the entries or what was there written.
14. He read out the numbers 572 and 586" and "$1,55."
15.—The Captain Superintendent of Police asked him to explain what these figures meant. He replied. "It is the money of a gambling house."
16. He was then asked, “What did you pay to No. 586?” He replied "$10 a week."
17.—He was then asked, "How is $10 a week arrived 21?" He replied, *70 cents a day fr que gambling house," the paper or necount of which was than before hiru, and 70 comes a day for mother gambling house whose paper or account was not before them.
15. He was then asked, "Who was No. 586?" He replied, "He was the Indian Inspector."
19.—He was then asked, “What sort of uniform did Policewau No. 586 wear?" He replied, “A uniform similar to Indian Police constables with the tellition by a red sosh round the shoulder."
20.--Thon get question was, "When need you to pay this sun?" to replied & diurnal
to be prompted t e Captain Superintendent of Polige), "last year."
ving
21.--He was thon asked by the Captain Suporintendent of Police "Why did you pay money to the Indian Fuspector?" He replied, "Reenuse otherwise he would have beaten me," Did he ever beat or strike you?" He replied, "No." "What was your work or employment?" He replied, "I was a watchuau to gambling houses.”
22.—After thús the Captain. Saperintendent of Police asked me what I had to say to this. The Captain Superin- tendent of Pulioc then informed me that the statement of the two above-mentioned Chinamon would be forwarded to His Excellency the Governor of Hongkong.
23. was theu told I could go, and lett the gnol.
24-I say that I sever saw or had any communication or dealing with either of the two above-mentioned Chinamon and it is absolutely untrue that I received the sum of $10 a week or any other sum or suras of money from both or either of them.
ہا کر دیدی
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.