520
ar.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
|
a
4
him in
|
[June 21, 1909.
At the interview with Mr. Dixon you told him you had caused independent inquiries to be made. I presume you meant the inquiries by Mr. Hansen? Yes and my own, I meant in- quiries independent of my Chinese staff.
Did you take any note of this interview with Mr. Dixon ?-I wrote to my brother about it. Did you keep a copy of that letter ?—I did. It sets forth what you say took place ?—It gives an account.
It gives a summary ?—Yes.
The letter was put in and read. Although you did not specify any particular case of embezzlement you say he admitted it.-
Yes.
Did
you ask him to give instances?—I did not. The cross-examination of Mr. John Hastings was continned after the tiffin adjournment.
You did not think it advisable to call a third person in to be present at your interview with Mr. Dixon -The matter was between him and
me.
Did you make any answer to this letter of Ewens and Harston P-I instructed Mr. Wilkinson, my solicior, to see Mr. Harston and to explain the facts to him fully immediately
received that letter.
You see by that letter that Mr. Dixon was quite willing you should bring a criminal charge-The letter speaks for itself.
and responsibility, and it is impossible that, which was in connection with the action taken It would be advisable to have an independent It would you can be continued in such position unless by the Kwong Hung Cheong firm against person to corroborate the statement? this firm has complete confidence in you, Renter, Brockelmann and Company. ar. Wong have been advisable. I would have been glad if which, of course, cannot be the case after Hui Tung came to see witness about the costs. a third person had been present. what has occurred. The agreement between As to Gulab, witness ascertained. the facts for If you had been advising a client in these ns must be cancelled. I do not mind you himself. On the 26th March he had an inter-circumstances wouldn't you tell him to be sure staying on a month or two to give you time to view with Mr. Dixon, to whom he stated that and have a third party present at the inter- make your plans, and to see what you can do. it had been reported to him that Mr. Dixon had view?--I don't think so. I should be glad to know particulars of the been in the habit of receiving money for costs amount you have taken from office monies, and from clients and paying a portion to the office to have the same refunded." Counsel submitted and keeping a portion to himself. Witness that it could hardly be said that was the letter afded that he was informed this had been done of a vindictive man. He wanted to cover Mr generally in Police Court cases or cases in which Dixon as much as passible, and to give him a Mr. Dixon had received money in cash from chance of making more money before he went. clients. He told defendant that he had made At any rate, Mr. Hastings did not want to do independent inquiries on the matter and had anything harsh. No reply to that letter was obtained evidence which satisfied him that the received, and on April 2nd Mr. Hastings wrote information given was true. Mr. Dixon said asking Mr. Dixon to return the agreement it was not so, and left the room and almost signed. On the same day a reply was received immediately witness called him back and from Messrs. Ewens and Harston, stating that told him he had evidence in his possession on they had been consulted by Mr. Dixon re- which he could prosecnte him, but he did not lative to Mr. Hastings' letter of the 31st | wish to do so. He would like him to go away March. Mr. Dixon had instructed them to
as it was impossible he could keep him in the deny the charges advanced against him, and office. Mr. Dixon then admitted having taken further to inform Mr. Hastings that in view of money from the office, but the amounts were his statement to Mr. Dixon at the interview on small and the occassions were not many. Witness the 26th that Hung Kam Ning admitted that said the amount was not the question, it was the charges were true, and that Mr. Dixon was matter of principle. He was in a posi- implicated, that Mr. Harston had seen Huugtion of trust and witness said he could not and was informed by him that he had never
was possible to keep see how it admitted the truth of the charges, but the office. Witness suggested he should strenuously denied them. In view of the
and go away
practise somewhere else, charges brought, the letter continued. Messrs. to which he replied that he had no place to go. Ewens and Harston could well understand He could not go home because his father had that the relations between the plaintiff and the two sons in the business. Witness did not know defendant were somewhat strained, but possibly that Mr. Dixon had two brothers. He suggested if Mr. Harston could meet Mr. Hastings to other places to which he could go, and attributed discuss the matter. some satisfactory what had happened to the fact that he was living rangement might be arrived at. In the
with a European woman which would run him meantime it
to be understood was
that into more expense than he could afford. Mr. Mr. Dixon claimed his rights were valid Dixon said it did not, and witness added that his and subsisting. On the day he received that brother had spoken to Mr. Dixou on the subject letter Mr. Hastings had another interview with and the latter promised theu to give up that Mr. Dixon, and Counsel would quote Mr. Hast mode of life. Mr. Dixon begged to be given ings exact words. What do you mean by another chance and said that what had occurred admitting this thing to me, and then going to a would be lesson to him. He said also that he firm of solicitors and instructing them to deny could have taken thousands if he had wished. it?" Mr. Dixon replied, "I must deny it, or I He begged witness to reconsider the matter and shall go under altogether." Mr. Hastings told write to his brother. Witness replied that he him that there was no necessity to go under had already written to his brother. He was altogether, as there were other places in the certain Mr. Dixon made those admissions. On world besides Hongkong. Mr. Dixon then March 31st he wrote a letter to Mr. Dixon and asked Mr. Hasting if he would let him practice not having received a reply he wrote another on in Hongkong, but that Mr. Hastings absolutely April_2ud. To the latter he received a reply refused to do. That ended the second and last from Messes. Eweus and Harston, and on receipt interview. He did not know what the defence | he called Mr. Dixon into his room, and asked would be. He did not know how the dhim What do you mean by admitting this fendant would be able to get over the thing to me and instructing a firm of solicitors difficulty created by his own language at to deny it." Mr. Dixon said "I must those interviews, but he gathered that deny it or go under altogether, Witness the defence would be a total denial that he replied" Why should you go under altogeth- ever used those words which meant that Mr.
er? Hongkong is not the only place in the world, Hastings had invented those conversations and and του can make your living anywhere. invented them with a marvellous particularity | If
you wish to fight we must fight. for instance, that one in which Mr. Uixou said He said- I dont want to fight, will that he could not go home to his father who you consent to my practising here as a solicitor?"
Mr. Hust-Witness replied-"Certainly not. He said- had already two sous in the office. ings did not know that Mr. Dixon had two brothers, so that those conversations are either true or are inventions, He would ask their Lordships, after hearing the evidence of witnesses and hearing the defendant's explan- ation as to those charges, to say that the charges were true and that however painful it might be to their Lordships, they would have to decide what punishment was sufficient in a case of this kind.
Mr. John Hastings, senior partner in the firm of Hastings and Hastings, was then called. He said Mr. Dixon joined their firm in 1904 as an assistant solicitor. Ou April 5th, 1907 they entered into another agreement with Mr. Dixon whereby he was to continue in their employment for another five years at the end of which term he was to be offered a partnership. He was a very valuable man and the firm had no desire to get rid of him. On the contrary, they expected that he would be of great service to the firm when witness took his departure from the colony. Witness detailed the procedure in the office for dealing with receipts, and spoke to interviews which he had with his present interpreter and a former interpreter, in consequence of which conversations he applied to Detective Insp. Hanson to make certain inquiries in the case of
Wong Hee. Witness mentioned how he came into contact with Wong Hui Tung,
|
"I will undertake not to take away your clients from you or some words to that effect. Witness said-Certainly not.
"
་་
Had you any wish to fight Mr. Dixon, in this case. - No. You had no motive to attempt to ruin him or get rid of him? None whatever. He was a most useful man in my office.
Cross-examined-When his interpreter spoke to him on the first occasion he did not specify any particular item. He said that he got his information, with the exception of one case from Hun Kum Ning. Witness told counsel that he obtained evidence through Mr. Hansen with regard to a certain other case. There was no one present but Mr. Dixon and himself at the interview.
Why didn't you take the precaution to have a third party present at the interview at which you were going to charge him with eubezzle. ment?-I didn't think it necessary.
You make a serious accusation against a young man which will ruin him although you had seven weeks to consider the matter, and yet you did not call in an independent witness?-I 'didn't think it necessary.
Isn't it usual when a person is charged with being guilty of embezzlement that the person should make a statement?—I suppose sometimes they make statements and sometimes they don't. There is no “usual” about it.
|
Although he was charged with this offence you did not think of suspending him until April 30th-Immediately after this letter was written, Mr. Harston suggested that this matter should We said we were be referred to arbitration. willing to submit it. An agreement was pre- pared for arbitration, and negotiations for that That is agreement went on for many weeks, the reason why no steps were taken while negotiations were pending.
I put it to you that while these negotiations were pending you wrote the letter of April 3 th ? taken --I stated that no proceedings were while negotictions were pending.
This is the letter you wrote: "The situation is becoming too strained. We have had several complaints during the last few days both from out clerks and from clients with regard to your conduct of business and towards clients, and We are convinced that our business is uffering damage in consequence. We have therefore determined to suspend you from office, and we accordingly do so from this date until the matter is investigated by the Chief Justice and a decision given. With regard to that letter you say that Mr. Dixon's conduct to clients made your business suffer. Can you give the names of any clients who complained anything he had done? I can.
Who Were these clients P I myself heard Mr. Dixon speaking very roughly indeed to a Chinese client, and the client subsequently came to my room and asked me to take the case out of Mr. Dixon's hands because Mr. Dixon had spoken so rudely and roughly to him, and to attend to the matter myself, which I did.
What was the name of that client P-Lai Hung Sheung. I think that is the Chinese name. He is a junk owner, and lives at Shaukiwan.
Did any other client complain ?—No.
Your letter said you had had several com. plaints both from your clerks and from clients, that is plural. So there was only one client?— One client.
Why did you write clients?—Two men came to complain.
Two clients?-A client and a man who was with him.
Did they complain direct to you ?—They did. You know that Mr. Dixon wrote you a letter in answer to yours of the 30th? --I do.
[Mr. Dixon's letter stated, " My conduct of business and manner towards clients during the last few days has been the same as it has always been. I do not admit that you were justified in suspending me, and reserve my full legal right."]
After he denied the allegation regarding his conduct and manner towards clents, did you
}
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.