552
When you first saw Mr. Hastings on 2nd February why didn't you tell him you saw Mr. Dixon, put money in the drawer? Because I did not think he had done anything in that ease. I doubted at that time whether »r. Dixou would hare done such a thing.
Didn't you think it very strange that Mr. Dixon should keep this money-I think he might take it for granted that I would think he would pay the cashier,
If he did not pay the cashier there would be a check on it, because you saw him put the money in the drawer ?—Yes.
On the 2nd February did you go in to see Mr. Hastings about Mr. Dixon ?— vbout that; time. I can't remember the day.
Did Hung go with you ?-No.
Did yon report that Mr. Dixon had taken i money-related my interview with Mr. |
Hung.
Yon did not say Mr. Dixon had taken money, but you said Hung had told you?—Yes.
Why didn't you get Mr. Hang with you ?—I did not think it was necessary,
You knew nothing about the matter ?—Yes. Why didn't you get Hung to tell the story? -Because I did not think it necessary.
How long have you been in a solicitor's office? Five years.
Didn't you think it very important ?—I did not think it very important.
You did not think it very important that Mr. Dixon should be charged with embezzling money I did not think it important to tell Mr. Hastings.
Did you think what Mr. Hung said was important?--Yes
L'idn't you think it was better that Hung | should tell his own story rather than that you should tell it if it was so important 2-1 never thought about that at the time. I told Mr. Hastings about it after my work.
When did you first make up your mind to tell Mr. Hastings about this ---On the day I told him.
Some days after Hung told you? --Yes. More than ten days after Hung had told you? -About that.
What caused you to make up your mind to tell Mr. Hastings —– ecause Hung told me it was very dangerous for him to remain in such a position and that was why he left.
The Chief Justice-That is not the question. Why did you take ten days to make up your mind?
Witness-Because there was no proof of Hung's story.
Mr. Calthrop-When you told Mr. Hastings there were no proofs ?--No.
Then why did you tell Mr. Hastings if there were no proofs?—I thought it was the best thing to do.
What would be the first business day after China New Year?-The third day of the year.
That is the 25th. That was when you went back to the office? - Yes.
You did not tell Mr. Hastings then — No. Why? Because I had not made up my mind. Didn't it strike you as curious that Mr. Has- tings should think of taking back Hung as interpreter if he admitted taking some of the money-Mr. Hastings said he would cou- sider it.
Don't you think it strange that he should consider such a suggestion?-I thought he might have said so in order to get information out of him.
With regard to the balance in the Wan Hi case, you say $20 would have to be paid because Wan Hi had agreed to pay $50 iu all?—Yes,
You know in some cases when practically very little work is done a smaller sam than that agreed is taken ?—Yes.
And you knew Mr. Dixon only went to the Magistracy for a very brief time-Yes. but Wan Hi came to the office to pay. He didn't know the case was withdrawn :" he thought his friend was liberated owing to our efforts,
Didn't you make a record declaration on the 11th of June - Yes.
Why did you make it ?-Because I was asked to make it.
Why didn't you set out fully the conversation you had with Hang on the 5th of June? - I didn't think it necessary to set the whole fact out.
Had you at that time seen the second affidavit | made by Mr. Dixon ?-No.
|
|
|
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
Then how did you know that it was enough to support the summons if you did not read Mr. Dixon's affidavit?-Because I was told that Mr. Fixon's affidavit set out a lot of things about Mr. Hung, so I was asked to make a declara- tion about Mr. Hung.
Had you been given the details of Mr. Dixon's second affidavit? Not at the time I was asked to make my declaration.
(June 26, 1909.
Did you go to any solicitor's with regard to your case?—I went to Mr. Wilkinson and got a petition sent to England.
What made you change from Mr. Hastings to Mr. Wilkinson --Mecause Mr. Dixon told me they would charge me $200 for sending a petition to the Secretary of State. I thought that was too much.
Did you not have an interview with Mr. How could you then know your declaration Hastings and Mr. Dixon as to the cost of sending was sufficient -Because my declaration was aa petition to Eugland?-I only went once. summary of what took place in conversation. I saw Mr. Dixon alone.
Re-examined by Mr. Potter:
Was the suggestion that Mr. Hung should come hack made by you or Mr. Hastings : - It came from Hung and I supported it.
Did it come from Mr. Hastings?- No; he said he would consider it.
Jemadar Gulab was then called to give evidence.
Were you a jemadar in the Hongkong "Police Force-Yes.
How long for?-I was jemadar for one year. How long were you in the Police Force?-17 years.
Did you not have an interview with Mr. Hastings and Mr. Dixon-Yes, many times.
And wasn't the cost of sending a petition to England discussed at these interviews?-Yes, Mr. Dixon sometimes told me alone they would charge me $200, and sometimes Mr. Hastings and Mr. Dixon said so.
Why did you say you did not discuss it with Mr. Hastings?r. Hastings and Mr. Dixon fold me the cost of sending a petition to En- gland would be $200.
Was that in addition to what you had already paid Yes, $200 in addition to the $9) paid
Did you in January last go to Messrs. Hastings already. and Hastings?—Yes.
What about?-For my case.
What case? I was dismissed from the police, and I wanted to get a pension from the Govern- ment.
Who did you see?—I went to Mr. Dixon first, Did he take charge of your case ?—Yes. Do you remember paying him on the 27th of January $40—Yes.
Do you know Alannah-No.
Do you know an Indian draper -There are many Indian drapers.
Do you know one who lives over Jr Hastings' office - No.
Have you ever spoken to any Indian about this case-1 can't remember.
Do you remember any Indian in Mr Hastings' office asking you about it?—I can't remember
Didn't you tell an Indian you met in the
Did you pay it to him yourself -Yes. Did you get a receipt ---No. I did not ask him building where Mr Hastings' office is that you for one.
On March 3rd, you paid 850 ?—Yes. Cross-examined by "Mr. Calthrop: Are you quite sure you paid $40 and uot £30?—I paid $40. What makes you remember so particularly that you paid. 840?—I gave him four ten dollar bank notes and made a note of the date in my pocket-book.
You made a declaration in this matter ou 27th May - Yes.
Why didn't you say in that declaration that you made a note of the date?—I was not asked. You were not told at the time of the declara- tion that Mr. Dixon's hooks showed only $30 had been paid? -No.
Mr. Hastings did not tell you that?-- No.
If his books had shown $30 and not $40 wid you had been told that, would you have been prepared to swear that ?--I swear I paid £40.
When did you first see Mr. Hastings-I did not go to Mr. Hastings. I went to see Mr.
Dixon.
What made you go there ?—I used to go frequently to see how my case was standing.
Did you speak to Mr. Hastings in English or was there an interpreter ?—I spoke to him myself.
Then you understand the questions I am putting to you without an interpreter?-I can't say I understand everyone of the questions. Since I left the police force I am a bit deaf.
If I speak loud enough do you understand me? Yes.
After the statement was taken down what happened I left the office.
When did you next see Mr. Hastings-I had been many times afterwards, and on one occasion I was told my case would not be put before the Governor in Council.
When did you next see Mr. Hastings with regard to the payment of $40?—I did not go to him again.
Have you seen Mr. Hastings in connection with the present inquiry?—No
Do you know what this inquiry is about?— No.
Do you know what the matter is concerning which you made a statement?-I was asked to
make a statement.
Who asked you?-About ten days after the 27th January I went to the office and Mr. Has tings asked how my case was going on, I said · r.
Dixon said he would write to the Governor.
Then he asked how much I had paid to the office and I said $40. Then he took down my state-
ment.
What happened: "Then I signed the statement.
Who was present?-Nobody was present, but Mr. Wilkinson came in and signed the
statement.
had paid $80 for this case?-No.
How was it you came to leave the police force?-A made-up case was brought against
me.
What was this case about-n indecent charge.
With whom was this charge of indecency made Chinese lukong.
And you were in consequence of that dismissed from the force-Yes; that is so.
And lost all your pension?—Yes.
Did you before you left the force sign & confession of your guilt?-No; I did not sign a confession. I said I had witnesses who could give evidence for me, but they were not called at all.
Did you sign a document-I did sign some- thing which the Assistant Superintendent of Police made me sigu. He said be would write the Government about my pension.
Did you sign a blank piece of paper above which the Assistant Superintendent of Police wrote something?—Yes.
Re-examined by Mr. Potter: Did Mr. Wode- house give you a character when you left the police force-Yes.
Mr Potter then read the character, which was couched in complimentary terms, saying that it was, however, necessary in the interests of discipline that the offence should not be over looked.
This concluded the case for the applicant.
MR. DIXON IN THE WITNESS BOX. Clive Fletcher Dixon said he came from Northwich in Cheshire. His father was a solicitor practising in Northwich and Wins- ford. He was in business for himself and had been in practice for 40 years on his own account. He had a partner until about 20 years ago. Witness had five brothers, two of whom were in the legal profession. The elder was articled in Liverpool and was now a partner in the firm of Martin and Dixon at Nantwich. His other brother passed his final examination last June and was now with his father. Before witness came out here he communicated with Mr. George Hastings ou his father's notepaper and during the four years ho had been here he had been on fairly friendly terms with Mr. George Hastings, with whom he had talked occasionally over family affairs. Witness was articled to a firm of solicitors, Thomson and Macmaster, in Liverpool in 1894, and after he passed his final he was engaged as conveyancing clerk in the city of ereford, where he remained two years. From there he went to the firm of Simp. son and Simpson in Leeds and remained there two years, when he went to his father with the idea of managing his Winsford practice, He was with his father a year before he came out here. Witness got into correspondence
$
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.