+
14
19, 1858.]
The Hongkong Government Gazette.
Estuct from the " Hongkong Register" of the 4th day
of May, 1858.
----
REPORT.
Your Committee considering this
*
7
Acting Colonial Secretary implies not in rely on wholeness and singleness of his character as Sokomial Secretary, jare enquired into his entire conduct in reference to all metres conseted with the grant of the Opium Monopoly. Your Committee have also allowed themselves as wide a range as posible in their method of inquiry. They advertised in the local papers the publicity of their proceedings, and invited and made use of greations from all sources as to the witnesses to be examined and the questions to be put to them. -They permitted themselves great latitulle in the kind of evidence which they admitted, and only struck out as inadmissible one question omitted to call only one witness suggested to them, as his evidence and its answer, and part of the answer to another question.They would not have referred to the matter under enquiry; and every person invited to give their information did so, with the exception of Mr ocy. His evidence would have been important, but he refused to attend, whence they conclude that he dared not day before them having made those defamatory statements (though he has, elsewhere denied having made them) which gave rise to the present inquiry.
Your Committee have now to report as the result of their prɔ- ceelings, as follows :
1st. It appears that the tender of the present Monopolist (Chan- tal-kwong), and those of two other persons, were not received by the Acting Colonial Secretary until the 14th March, the day after the last day for tendering; that Chun-tai-kwong's tender was the highest, and, the reason given for the lateness of his tender being satisfactory to His Excellency, that it was accepted by him, with a full knowledge of the facts, on the 15th March; that two days after this, on the 17th March, the Opium Monopoly Ordinance passed the the Monopolist, and suggested by him or his partners to the Acting Legislative Council, on which day various changes highly favorable to Colonial Secretary, were introduced into the Ordinance on the Acting Colonial Secretary's motion, but that this was done with the most perfect openness the Members of the Legislative Council being fully informed by Dr Bridges of his reasons for proposing the alterations. It does not appear that any undue influence was used in obtaining the grant for the present Monopolist; or that any corrupt motive existed for making these changes in the Ordinance; and there is not the slightest ground for believing that anything in the nature of a douceur was offered to, demanded by, or accepted by, Dr Bridges.
cres of Ivane Butt, Esq., Barrister and M.P. for Young-hce should he teken in
W. T. Bridges, Esq., D.C.L., Barrister and Member of Corporation-the Legislative Council of Hongkong, seem rna on fours. Mr Butt has been acquitted by the com- ciated to investigate his conduct, and wo"hope Dr Would also be acquitted were a committee appointed to this connection as standing counsel for the Opium Mono- There has nufortunately for Dr Bridges been no committee 4, and so the slander goes unrefuted-and slander of this We fortunately are not the guardians of Dr tover dies.
's good name, and as simple barrister his name may be as is his gown for anything we or the public would care about er, but as a member of the British Government representing justice to the Chinese, we confess to a more tender care to stands in the position of Cæsar's wife; he should not not guilty, but he should not even be suspected. That slike Me Butt is not guilty we are happy to believe, but is suspected we are sorry to say cannot be denied. What ideas impressed on the Chinese mind, and we understand stated by Chun-tai-kwong, the Opium Monopolist? "That ges is a very clever man, all powerful with the Governor or vernment; that he can make, unmake, or remake law as he <;" a man therefore to be feared and propitiated. All this be true, and the Acting Colonial Secretary may still be a by, honest, hard-working government servant, who would receive a bribe directly or indirectly-directly, in the shape, of money paid as a douceur-indirectly, say in the shape of a retaining fee to which his legal abilities by themselves alone I not entitle him. We do not believe in the douceur; and ch the retaining fee is said to be a heavy one, we certainly : look upon it as an improper thing that a barrister should get he asks; he is not compelled to sell his services at any parti- price, and if they are thought worthy by the purchaser of the Amanded, the thing is between the seller and buyer, the attorney ent, or rather the more unusual connection, of barrister and t. The only ground on which we feel called upon to remark this subject is, the effect it has on the Chinese. We pointed out discordant nature of the duties to be performed as a private asing barrister, and as an Acting Colonial Secretary, and here have the evil realised. Dr Bridges is in the Chinese eye a ria in power, a person having a voice in giving a monopoly; And all Englishmen well know that when the monopolist engages services as counsel that there is, there can be, no back-stairs ruce brought to bear for the fee. Shortly, however, the palist finds himself compelled to resort to law; perhaps he er expect this counsel to attend for him before the Magistrate's but is informed that so high a mondarin as the Acting Colonial tary cannot plead before an inferior Mandarin, the Chief trate, and in addition that as a justice of the peace, he cannot ar for a client in his (the J. P's.) own court. All this is e and straightforward enough to English people, but to the the impression is conveyed of the great dignity of the in Bridges; and with great dignity of place great power is tated. That is the impression conveyed in any case, how much - in the present case when we have one man in three characters st, as one of the law-makers, then, as one of the granters, and yas the legal advisor and supporter of the monopolist in his aac Butt is, we understand, a very talented man, and for his services were, in view of their extent, no great certainly a small sum when we remember that a Mr John little known to fame as a barrister, received that sum as
el for defending Jotee Persand; infinitely less when Sir F. ger gets a retaining fee with his brief of 1000 guineas with a tester of 500 guineas per day in the trial of the British Bank stors. But the money is not the point, and the service to be red for the money is not the point. The point is, that he ry as the paid advocate, at the same time he holds the position e of the judges in the cause. This is the case as nearly as an understand it of Dr Bridges, if it be not perhaps a little 2 in his case. The House of Commons, not doubting the r of its members, is yet so jealous of its privileges that it will et caffer a member to underlie the shade of an imputation, and in the constituencies agree. Here we have the Close Corporation Legislative Council, shewing no great impatience as to it or abers underlying a grave charge. Most probably they do lieve the charge, and in that they are perhaps joined by the table British population, but behind this is a population British Foreign, and native above all, who, not understanding the en know not what exactly to think, and as every thing un- a is supposed to be worse than it really is, perhaps prepared
up their mind to think the very worst. ask, in conclusion, our general readers to peruse with care Accompanying article from the Daily News on Mr Butt's case, our government whether or not it would not more consort their honor and open dealing, if all the facts of the case as to a most odious and oppressive monopoly on sealed tenders, Could have been sold in open and fair market, then as to the rayal of the first grant, and finally as to the regranting it on
terms to the same person, were made known,
And we do we ask too much, in asking the Acting Colonial Secretary the public, which pays him, some explanation of the very itful position in which he at present stands :—
**kke
[Here follows Extract from the “ Daily News."}
2d. The above matters being the only ones connected with the grant or honour of the Acting Colonial Secretary could be involved, your of the Opium Monopoly, in which it has been suggested that the honesty Committee are clearly of opinion that the honesty and honour of Dr Bridges, in reference to all proceedings connected with the grant of the Opium Monopoly, remain wholly unimpeached.
3d. It further appears that, early on the morning of the 17th March,the day when the Ordinance passed, and when the alterations referred to were made in it--or of some subsequent day, the Monopolist retained Dr Bridges as his Counsel; that on the 25th March, imme- diately after the Monopolist had executed a Bond to Gorerament connected with the Monopoly at the Government Offices, Dr Bridges called the Clerk of the Councils into the Colonial Secretary's Room, that he might hear Dr Bridges tell the Monopolist that though he was the Fee on the Retainer was paid in the evening of the same day to Dr his Counsel, he could not act for him against the Government; that Bridges at his house, and that the Monopolist had ascertained some days previously from Dr Bridges's Comprador what the amount of Bridges; that when Dr Bridges accepted the Office of Acting Colonial the Fee should be, but without the knowledge or sanction of Dr Secretary in February, 1857, it was on an express understanding with the Governor that he should be allowed to practice as a Barrister, Bridges at the time he accepted the Retainer from the Monopolist, that and that his time should be his own; and that it did not occur to De there might on future and various occasions be questions connected Member of the Executive Council would seriously clash with his duty with the Opium Monopoly in which his duty to the Government as a
though the Monopolist now denies it, and the evidence is conflicting as Counsel to the Monopolist. It further appeared to your Committee
clever man; he can do what he likes with the Governor, and can --that the Monopolist did say to Mr Hoey," Dr Bridges is a very make a Law and tear it to pieces again the next day."
4th. These proceedings in the opinion of your Committee shew the want of a due appreciation by Dr Bridges of the demands of his high and important offices as Acting Colonial Secretary, Member of the Legislative Council, and Member of the Executive Council; and denote above all other persons, foresee and avoid all positions of possible con. an absence of that proper sensitiveness which should have made him, fict between his Public and Private Duties, which, in the case of the Opium Monopoly, were sufficiently obvious,
time retain the privilege of practicing as a Barrister, however undesirable That Dr Bridges should hold the offices mentioned, and at the same a state of things, is one for which he cannot be blamed; but the limits within which he would avail himself of this privilege were under his Government, and the place in which he informed his client of this own control. He fixed the limit that he would not act against the fact was most unhappily chosen. Further, he should have seen that any one, more particularly a Chinaman, must think that he would greatly gain by employing as his Coun high officer of Government, through whose means changes so bencial to himself had been made and the Chinese community generally would conclude, however erron at the last moment in a Public Ordinance, and that the Monopolist eously, that the official so retained, and the Government of which be was a Member, were open to private influence. That such must be the effect of Dr Bridges's conduct on the minds of the Chinese, there
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.