the-history-of-the-laws-and-courts-of-ho — Page 33

an inquiry into the whole facts, before the Executive Council.
An important element not to be lost sight of was that in the
books found in Ma Chow Wong's possession, there were entries
of pecuniary transactions between him and Mr. Caldwell.

The undue
support Another extraordinary circumstance is shown in this matter
held forth by the undue support which Dr. Bridges held forth to Mr.
to Mr. Caldwell. After the finding of the books in the pirate's posses-
Caldwell
by Dr. sion , Mr. May, Superintendent of Police, and Mr. Inglis,
Bridges.
Governor of the Gaol, were directed to inquire into and report
Report of upon them. Subsequently Mr. May reported thus : --
Messrs . May
and Inglis " Ma Chow Wong has been apprehended and his house searched , the books
after the
and papers being seized , amongst the latter are some papers in Mr. Cald-
finding of
the pirate's well's writing, showing that he had taken a direct interest in the business of
books. Ma Chow Wong. There are some entries in Chinese of moneys received
from or for Mr. Caldwell."


Relation- Mr. Inglis ' report was corroborative of Mr. May's as regarded
ship by an evident intimacy between Mr. Caldwell and the pirate, and
Chinese
usage be went so far as to allege " a relationship by Chinese usage between
tween Mr. them ." Dr. Bridges, however, saw fit thus to remark on Messrs.
Caldwell and
the pirate. May and Inglis' report : -

"I have no hesitation in advising His Excellency that I conceive both Mr.
May and Mr. Inglis to be more actuated by a desire to injure Mr. Caldwell,
of whose position both are jealous, than by a real wish to advance public
interests."


The baseness The frivolousness, to say nothing of the baseness of this alle-
of Dr. ct . gation, was most apparent .
Brid- Mr. May's length of service and
ges' condu
ability, it is recorded , gave him prospect for promotion to the
Magistracy entirely irrespective of the Registrar- General's
standing in the way ; and Mr. Inglis ' after-advancement to the
Harbour Mastership and Marine Magistracy was a probability,

* See antè Chap. IX. , p. 190, and references there given.
See the finding of the Executive Council in the charges brought by Mr. Caldwell
against Mr. May- Vol. II., Chap. xxxv.
 MA CHOW WONG, THE PIRATE , FINALLY DEALT WITH . 447


in which Mr. Caldwell's position could in no way interfere ; Chap. XIX.
--
while judging morally there were no grounds for assuming that 1857 .
either Mr. May or Mr. Inglis would depart from the strict line A Govern-
of probity for the simple purpose of injuring a brother - officer. ment inquiry
After the inquiry had been acquiesced in, however, and after in,
lengthy sittings in which the Governor, Lieutenant- General
'The law to
Ashburnham, Colonel Caine, and Dr. Bridges himself took part, the la
it was decided to allow the law to take its course. course.'


Ma Chow Wong, who up to this time had been allowed to retain Ma Chow
his ' queue ' in defiance of the prison rules which authorized the Wong
upon thturned
e
docking of tails of all Chinese sentenced to transportation, was roads.
turned upon
the roads on the 27th October, along with the
other convicts pending deportation . It will be seen later on, in Mr. Anstey's
reference to the charges which Mr. Anstey, the Attorney-Gene- subsequent
charges
ral, brought against Mr. Caldwell, that it was not astonishing against Mr.
Caldwell.
that the latter had so very much exerted himself in endeavouring The reason
to obtain Ma Chow Wong's release. it
It may be appropriate here for Mr. Cald-
to mention that the piracy of which this man was convicted was well's exer-
tions on be.
only one of a huge series extending over several years. The half of Ma
Chow Wong.
case wherein he had been convicted was a most horrible one, a
Ma Chow
boat of which he was part owner having captured a vessel laden wong's
with sugar and other goods, the crew, including some of their career.
wives, were murdered and thrown overboard , while part of the
cargo, as before stated, was placed and found in the pirate's
warehouse, and formed evidence in the investigation. *

The attention of the community was drawn at this time to An anony-
an anonymous letter in The Straits Guardian , of the 22nd mous in Theletter
August. on the subject of Hongkong affairs, and addressed to Straits
Guardian,
the Right Honourable the Earl of Harrowby. The document addressed
which occupied six-and-a -half columns of the paper was criti- to the Earl
of Harrowby,
cized locally as a strange admixture of truth and falsehood , on Hong-
and, though anonymous, its origin was traced to a certain "dila- kong affairs.
pidated individual " in Hongkong. Amongst others, Governor
Bowring, Colonel Caine, ex- Sheriff Holdforth, Mr. Mercer, Dr.
Bridges, Mr. Anstey, Mr. Cooper Turner, Mr.Caldwell , against
all of whom the writer was known to have an ill - will, came
in for abuse . Consequent upon this letter being attributed Letter
to Mr. Y. J. Murrow (whose name already appears in this attributed
to Mr Y. J.
work in connexion with Mr. Anstey, in February last ) ,† Murrow.
he, on the 30th September, addressed Lord Harrowby denying addresses
Mr. Murrow
that he was the author of the letter, and at the same time setting the Earl of
forth the treatment to which he had been subjected in con- Harrowby
setting
sequence from the hands of the Hongkong Government." Mr. out his
grievances.
See further Chap. XXIV., infrà., as to Ma Chow Wong, and his banishment to Labuan.
↑ Antè Chap. XVII. § II., p. 421.
448 HISTORY OF THE LAWS , ETC. , OF HONGKONG .


Chap. XIX. Murrow then proceeded to set out his grievances, attributing
1357. especially an increase in his land taxes to spite consequent
upon the authorship of the letter under consideration being
attributed to him, as there could be no question that he was the
party referred to as being a dilapidated individual, ' " because
our truculent Attorney - General in one of his splenetic effusions
that he converts the Supreme Court into an arena for indulging
in , designated him by calling him a dilapidated individual.'
This, no doubt, was a reference to the case of Cheong Ahlum ,
with regard to which Mr. Murrow, it will be remembered , had
complained without effect to the Governor about Mr. Anstey.*


Mr. Cleverly , On the 17th October the Surveyor - General, Mr. C. St. G.
Surveyor- Cleverly, was gazetted to a seat in the Legislative Council.
General,
gazetted to
a seat in
Council. On the 5th November Mr. W. H. Mitchell having returned
to the Colony and resumed his duties as Assistant Magistrate,
Return of Sheriff, and Marshal of the Vice- Admiralty Court, Messrs . May
Mr. Mitchell,
Assistant Ma- and Grand- Pré reverted to their respective offices of Superin-
gistrate, from tendent and Assistant Superintendent of Police.
leave.

A draft Ordinance, entitled " An Ordinance for checking the
spread of venereal disease," which had been read a third time
in the Legislative Council, was published in the Gazette of the
14th November and subsequently passed on the 24th of that
month and numbered 12 of 1857. Great complaints had been
Ordinance made by the Admirals on the station , ever since Hongkong
No. 12 of
1857. was a British settlement, of the serious diseases of a certain
Complaints kind contracted by their men on shore which almost made
of Admirals
on the their ships ineffective. These complaints assumed a definite
station . form while Admiral Sir James Sterling held the command, ‡
A definite
form when and it was then proposed to pass an Ordinance which, after
Admiral reference to the Home Authorities , now assumed a practical
Sterling held form.§
command.

Mr. Tarrant Mr. Tarrant, the editor of The Friend of China, having re-

against libel
repeats Dr. peated in effect the same libel for which he was fined in August
Bridges . last on the verdict of a jury, Dr. Bridges again brought him
before the Magistrate's Court. He gave evidence of a similar
character to that adduced on the first occasion . Mr. Tarrant

then said he had been writing under a misapprehension . Dr.
Bridges said he had no desire to trouble the Colony with such
prosecutions ; all he wanted was to vindicate his character.

* Antè Chap. XVII . § II ., p. 421. - See further in reference to Mr. Murrow and his
grievances, Vol. II., Chap. XXXVI.
Antè Chap. XVIII., p. 434.
See antè Chap. XIV. § II., p. 341 , note.
See further Vol. 11.. Chap. XL.
 A MYSTERIOUS ADVERTIZEMENT. 449


On this Mr. Tarrant offered to make the necessary apology to Chap. XIX .
be drawn up by Mr. Davies, the Chief Magistrate , and there, 1857.
apparently, the matter ended . He apolo-
gizes.

Mr. J. F. Edger, unofficial member of the Legislative Coun- Death of Mr.
Edger, mem
cil, * died at Shanghai on the 19th November, at the age of fifty- ber of the
five, and on the 26th December Mr. John Dent was gazetted to Legislative
Council.
the vacancy . Mr. Dent
gazetted to
On the departure from the Colony, on the 19th November, of the vacancy.
Major-Gene-
Lieutenant-General Ashburnham ,† Major- General Van Strau- ral Van
benzee , having assumed command of the Forces, was duly sworn Straubenzee
in command
in as a member of the Executive Council. of the Forces,


The following advertizement relative to the Chief Justice Therepresen
tatives of
appeared in the second column of The Times of the 1st December . "the late
It caused astonishment in the Colony afterwards, for no one Chief
HulmeJustice
" ad-
had ever heard of a contemporary Chief Justice Hulme, and vertized for
Mr. Hulme, the Chief Justice of Hongkong, the community in The Times.
were pleased to think, was still among them, and though an in-
valid, yet able to perform the functions of his office, -" a bless-
ing," it was said , " the Colony need well be thankful for. "
Rumour spoke of the Chief Justice's intention to retire at the end
of the year, if Government would grant him a reasonable pen-
sion after his long service in such a trying climate as that of
Hongkong, " when," added the report, the appointment of his
successor would then he looked for with much anxiety by all Advertize
ment a
in China." As it is, the advertizement was a mystery, nor was
mystery.
it ever explained away :--
The late Chief Justice Hulme.-The representatives of the above gentle-
man are requested to communicate with Messrs. Wilkinson & Kidd , Saddlers ,
257 Oxford Street, Corner of Park Street, W.

* See antè Chap. XII . § I., p. 287.
Antè Chap. XVIII., p. 432.
 450




CHAPTER XX.

1857-1858 .


SECTION I.

1857 .
Return of Mr. Anstey from leave.-Attempt to bribe him.- Compromise of felony not
only excused but encouraged by laws of China. - Mr. Anstey's recommendation upon the
subject. The Chief Justice approves. Apathy of the Chinese.-Loong Ah Sai charged
with attempt to drown a European.-Warning of Government to boat people witnessing
offences to render assistance.--Government Notification in 1880, on the law regulating the
arrest of offenders by private persons.- Marriage of Mr. Kingsmill, barrister. -Escape and
capture of the notorious convict Ho Ah Chee. -Improvements in the Gaol under Mr.
Inglis.
SECTION II.

1858 .
Office of assistant Superintendent of Police abolished . Mr. Grand-Pré appointed
'Collector of Police and Lighting Rates.'-Mr. Weatherhead appointed clerk of the Supreme
Court. Proceedings of the Legislative Council published for the first time . - Meetings of
the Legislative Council again asked to be held with open doors . -Motion in the Legislative
Council for admission of strangers forwarded to Secretary of State.-Orders for admission
to the Press issued. -Ordinance No. 1 of 1858. -Unsatisfactory state of affairs in the
Supreme Court.-Complaints of the Chinese against extortionate charges of attorneys.-
Frequent postponements and reference of cases to arbitration.-Cases adjourned at request
of attorneys without assigning reason or for want of an interpreter. -Complaint at cases
being frequently referred to Mr. Caldwell as arbitrator. -The Chief Justice taken to
task. Mr. Caldwell's heavy fees -The Chinese and their confidence in Chief Justice
Hulme. - Ordinance No. 3 of 1858 , s . 14.- Dissatisfaction in respect of the legal profes
sion. -The Attorney-General approached upon the question of amalgamation of
the profession.- The barristers' letter to Mr. Anstey upon the subject. - Mr. Anstey's
reply. The correspondence communicated by Mr. Anstey to the Law Society.-
The reply of the Secretary to the Law Society. - Meeting of the two branches of
the profession.- Mr. Anstey in the chair.-The result of the meeting.--Ordinance No. 3
of 1858.-Ordinance No. 12 of 1858.-Robbery and murder in the shop of Mr. Glatz,
watchmaker.- Capture of the murderer, Look Ah Song.-Interesting speech by Mr. Anstey
upon the state of crime in the Colony. -The Attorney-General congratulates the Court upon
reduction of piracy cases and attributes same to conviction of Ma Chow Wong.--Convic
tion and execution of Look Ah Song . - Case of Teep Ching Leu r. Lum Ah Kun, damages
for false imprisonment.-Extraordinary conduct of Mr. Anstey. counsel for plaintiff, in
his private capacity. - Mr. Anstey causes the defendant to be taken into custody for per
jury. Thejurors protest and allude to defective interpretation . Mr. Anstey leaves for Can-
ton. Mr. Anstey's arrest.- His reply to the protest of the jurors. The question of inter-
pretation treated. -Discharge of the defendant. Criticisms. - Complaints against the fee
paid for marriage to the Chaplain. Mr. Anstey's opinion. -Admission of Mr. Hazeland as an
attorney of the Court.- He joins Mr. Cooper Turner. the Crown Solicitor .- Wong A
Shing, the first Chinese juryman in Hongkong.-Mr. Anstey asks for Police protection.-
Conviction of two Chinese, one a pawnbroker, for larceny and receiving stolen property.-
Heavy sentence of transportation against the pawnbroker, the receiver.- The pawn
broker's sentence is commuted without the Attorney-General being consulted . The Chief
Justice and the Executive.-Ordinance No. 11 of 1858.-Escape of convicts from Gaol.-
A turnkey the worse for liquor. -The validity of marriages in China. Despatch from the
Foreign Office. - Mr. G. W. Caine, Colonel Caine's son, appointed Secretary to the Super-
intendency of Trade, vice Morrison. on leave. - Ordinance No. 2 of 1858. - First Ordinance
published in Chinese.-Motion of the Chief Justice that proceedings of Council be pub
lished as recorded in the Journal of the Clerk of Councils. - Ordinance No. 3 of 1858.-The
Crown against Mr. Y. J. Murrow for libelling the Governor, Sir John Bowring.- The inte
rests of the firm of Jardine. Matheson, & Co. , in which the Governor had a son a partner.
 THE APATHY OF THE CHINESE. 451

-The facts. -The defence.--The Chief Justice's summing up.- The verdict.--The defen-
dant sentenced to imprisonment and fine.-Mr. Murrow in the debtors' prison. -Afflicted
with Bowring-phobia.'-Sir John Bowring's shameful administration.- Mr. Murrow con-
ducts his paper in prison.-His attacks against Sir John Bowring continue unabated.-
The Illustrated London News upon the case and the weakness of Sir John Bowring.--On
his release Mr. Murrow claims $5.000 damages against Sir John Bowring. - Frequent
attempts at incendiarism.-Chu Aqui, a notorious pirate, at the head of incendiaries.- Mr.
Kingsmill, J.P., and Assistant Magistrate, rice Mr. Mitchell on leave.- Departure of Lady
Bowring. Her death. - Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act 20 and 21 Vict. c. 85.-
Ordinance No. 5 of 1858.
Chap. XX § I.
--
MR. ANSTEY returned from leave in India on the 13th Decem- Return of
ber per P. & O. steamer Cadiz , and at once resumed the duties from
Mr. Anstey
leave.
of his office. He returned before the expiry of his leave. *


A day or two after his return, an attempt was made by the Attempt to
friends of a prisoner in Gaol to bribe him. Mr. Austey had the bribe him.
man brought before the Chief Justice at the then pending Criminal
Sessions - not for punishment, as he said, but for warning ; for,
as Mr. Anstey remarked, the offence had been committed in Compromise
ignorance, compromise offelony, though condemned by the laws of of felony
only not
excused
England , being not only excused but encouraged by the laws of but encour
China. He had therefore brought the matter under His Lord- aged by laws
of China.
ship's notice, so as to secure his recommendation of a proposi- Mr. Anstey's
recommenda-
tion that means be adopted by the Government for pointing tion upon the
out to the native population the discrepancies betwixt their and subject .
our laws. The Chief Justice signified his most cordial approval The Chief
Justic e ap-
of such a step . proves.

The apathy of the Chinese, as pointed out in 1853 in the Apathy of
case of a serious assault and robbery upon Captain Mont- the Chinese.
gomery in which a by-stander stood on looking, without
affording the slightest assistance and who was afterwards
charged with misprision of felony, † was never more evident
again than when Loong Ah Sai, a coolie , stood charged in the Loong Ah
Supreme Court, on the 29th December, for attempting to drown withcharged
Sai attempt
a European . Though a large number of boat people and other to drown a
Chinese were present when the offence was committed , not European.
one of them offered the faintest help. The Government Warning of
issued a notification on the 1st January, 1858 , warning " all Government
to boat
registered boat people that it was their duty on witnessing people wit
assaults, robberies, or similar outrages to assist, so far as it may nessing
bences to
be in their power, the parties attacked , and not to push off render assist.
ance.
or in any way show a
from or neglect to return to the shore, or
culpable indifference as to the result." This warning was as
valuable as preaching in the desert, for it is one of those cha-
racteristics peculiar to the Chinaman which nothing will eradi-
cate.‡

* See ante Chap. XIX. , p. 439.
+ See Antè Chap. XIV. § I., p. 334.
See further on this subject, Vol. II., Chaps. LXXII., and LXXXIX.
452 HISTORY OF THE LAWS, ETC. , OF HONGKONG,

Chap. XX § I. The admirable suggestion of Mr. Anstey, however, to point
1857. out to the Chinese the difference between their own laws and
our own as regards the compounding of felony, although it met
with the full approval of the Chief Justice, was as a matter offact
Government never given effect to , but so long afterwards as in November,
Notification #
in 1880, on 1880, whether as an endeavour again to arouse the Chinese as
the law re-
to their sense of duty as citizens to render assistance whenever
gulating the
arrest of it was needed of them , or for whatever reason not recorded, the
offenders by Government issued a notification in English and in Chinese setting
private
persons. forth the law regulating the arrest of offenders by private persons.
What was the result of this notification it requires no clear- headed
person at all acquainted with such a people as the Chinese and the
migratory nature of the population of Hongkong, to foresee.

Marriage of On the return of Mr. Anstey from leave in India, Mr. Kings
Mr. Kings.
mill, barris- mill had to relinquish his temporary position of acting Attorney-
ter. General . Four days afterwards, the following interesting event
is to be found recorded in reference to him :---

" Marriage.- At St. John's Cathedral, Victoria, Hongkong, on the 17th
December, by the Right Reverend the Bishop of Victoria, Henry Kingsmill,
Junior, Esq., barrister-at-law, eldest son of Mr. Henry Kingsmill, of Sid-
monton, in the county of Wicklow , to Frances Elizabeth , eldest daughter of
the late Mr. Benjamin Warren, of Gloucester Terrace, Hyde Park, London.”

Escape and An important capture was effected at this period when a
capture of
the notorious notorious burglar named Ho Ah Chee, who had twice escaped
convict Ho from prison, fell into the clutches of the law again.
Ah Chee. The last
time, he was under sentence of transportation for fifteen years
for burglary committed in June last , and was to have been sent
to Labuan in the Annie in August last. Instructions had been
given some days previously that none of the convicts to embark
should be sent out on the roads ; but Ho Ah Chee not only
managed to evade the order the day before the ship sailed, but
effected his escape- it was thought in a sedan chair provided
for that purpose by his wife. Within ten days after his escape,
he broke into a house and secured $200 and was living quietly
in West Street, Taipingshan, when the authorities, hearing of his
whereabouts, arrested him. At the Criminal Sessions held on the
29th December, he was sentenced to two years ' imprisonment,
at the expiry of which his former sentence was to take effect.

Improve- Referring to the Gaol it may here be said that great improve-
ments in the
Gaol under ments had of late taken place since the appointment of Mr.
Mr. Inglis. Inglis as Governor of the Gaol, -a marked contrast as com-
pared with the past . Every prisoner had now his allotted task
* See Vol. II., Chap. LXXII.
Ante Chap. XIX., p. 440.
Ante Chap. XVIII., p. 428.
 IMPROVEMENT IN THE GAOL. 453


and no one was allowed to remain idle ; until very recently, Chap. XX § I.
the prisoners were in a measure left to the freedom of their own 1857.
wills, and contractors had to be engaged for every trifling bit
of work that had to be done or repairs to be made within the prison
walls . With Mr. Inglis ' advent not only were the rules of the
Gaol rigidly enforced, and the prison become a model of order
and cleanliness, but also ( besides the convicts employed in out-
door labour ) gangs of prisoners were organized consisting of
bricklayers, blacksmiths, carpenters , and others, and every de-
scription of work done by the convicts themselves, under the
personal supervision of the Governor of the Gaol . Ch. XX § II.
1858.
On the 1st January it was notified that, in consequence of Office of As
the office of Assistant Superintendent of Police having been intendent of
abolished, * the Governor had appointed Mr. A. Grand -Pré to Police
position , abolished.
-a position,
be " Collector of the Police and Lighting Rates "-a Mr. Grand-
it was said, which much better fitted him. The abolition of the Pré appoint-
Assistant Superintendentship of Police was, no doubt, owing to ed Collector
Mr. Caldwell having been taken into the service again, and Lighting
Rates.'
therefore through economy, as on Mr. Caldwell's re - employ Mr. Weather.
ment† be relinquished Police duties and had been given a better head
and higher position , with corresponding emoluments, than what appointed
clerk of the
he previously held or drew. On the 8th January Mr. Alfred Supreme
Court.
Weatherhead was gazetted Clerk of the Supreme Court.

For the first time in the history of the Colony, the pro- Proceedings
ceedings of the Legislative Council were published, on the of the Legis
lative
9th January, in The Government Gazette of that date. This Council
was a marked improvement on the past, and public opinion again
to asked
be held
now went further, and again demanded that the meetings of the with open
doors.
Legislative Council should be held with open doors.
Motion in the
Accordingly a motion in the Legislative Council , on the 11th Legislative
January, recommending the admission of strangers to the sit- admission
Council forof
tings of the Council on the introduction of members, was un- strangers
forwarded to
animously agreed to, and the Governor engaged to forward the Secretary of
same to the Secretary of State and to solicit his approval thereof. State.
This approval was afterwards received, and orders of admission admission
Orders forto
to the Press were issued on the 10th June. the Press
issued.

The Legislature, on the 11th January, passed Ordinance No. Ordinance
1 of 1858, further improving the law of criminal procedure in No.1 of 1858.
respect of informations and indictments .

* The first Assistant Superintendent of Police was Mr. Caldwell (antè Chap. v. § II.,
p. 128) who resigned the appointment in July, 1855, when he was succeeded in that posi
tion by Mr. Grand-Pré (ante Chap. XVI. § I., p. 361) .
† Ante Chap. XVII. § I., p. 408.
See antè Chap. XVII. § I., p . 406 .
454 . HISTORY OF THE LAWS , ETC. , OF HONGKONG.


Ch. XX § II. Delays in the hearing of causes in the Supreme Court, due
1858. to one cause or another, now began to be talked about, and
Unsatisfac- innumerable had been the complaints on all sides and amongst
tory state of
affairs in the the Chinese especially of the extortionate charges of the attor
*
Supreme neys . The unvarying reply to the complaints as to the law-
Court.
Complaints yers' charges apparently was that the aggrieved party could
of the Chi- always have their bills taxed , but unfortunately it was not cus-
nese against tomary then for the attorneys to tender bills to their Chinese
extortionate
charges of clients, though in some isolated cases presumably it may have
attorneys.
been done-the practice having been to name a certain sum for
which the attorneys would undertake a case, though they man-
aged generally to add a supplementary item to the account,
especially when their client proved successful. Whether this
system was in accordance with the rules ofCourt was not known,
but the Chinese knew little about the taxing of costs. But the
subject to which attention was more particularly drawn was a
Frequent custom which had crept in, under the Summary Jurisdiction of
postpone-
ments and the Court, of postponing cases from month to month, to the
referring frustration of justice and manifest injury of the party having
cases to
arbitration. right on his side, or, which was as bad, referring them to arbitra-
tion instead of deciding them in Court.

Cases Cases occasionally occurred which of necessity were delayed
adjourned
reque at
st of at- for a Sessions or two, but it was expected that in such cases the
torneys with Chief Justice would assure himself of the necessity for the post-
out assigning
reason or for ponement . But what ought to have been the exception had
want of an
now become the rule, and at every sitting of the Court, hearings
interpreter.
were postponed at the simple request of the attorneys, no reasons
for such postponement or at all events no proofs being demanded
at their hands. Often enough also cases were adjourned for
want of an interpreter.†

Complaint at A similar complaint applied to arbitration . The cases were by
cases being
frequently no means apparently so complicated as they were made to appear;
referred to and had the attorneys taken the trouble, which they professed
Mr. Caldwell
as arbitrator. they had, the statements to be laid before the Judge for decision
would have been promptly enough simplified . Cases were fre
quently referred to Mr. Caldwell , the Protector of Chinese, as
arbitrator, either by order of the Chief Justice or at the request
of the attorneys or of the parties themselves. The Chief Justice ,
it was said, enjoyed a very handsome salary for the performance
of his duties , and though Chinese accounts were sometimes
rather intricate and confused, a little trouble on the part of the
The Chief lawyers would have enabled His Lordship to arrive at the merits
to task. taken of the case, as readily at all events as Mr. Caldwell ; nor was
Justice
* On this subject, see antè Chap. XI., pp. 219 , 238 ; also Chap. XXII., infrà, and Vol.
II., Chap. XXXVII .
On this subject , see antè Chap. XVI, § 11., p. 381. and references there given.
 COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT. 455


there any reason why the Chief Justice, arduous as his duties Ch. XX § II.,
were, should have shifted them from his own shoulders to 1858.
those of one less able to bear them, and whose qualifications to well's
Mr. Cald
heavy
decide questions of law, and even of equity, were, as was very fees.
properly remarked, by no means of the highest order. Be-
sides, there was no necessity for clients to be put to additional
expense in such matters, for it was not to be expected that Mr.
Caldwell laboured without pay. The Court and lawyers ' fees
were heavy enough without those of an arbitrator being super-
added. In a recent case where the sum at issue was about $250
and the fees in which amounted to $ 60, it is recorded that
more than one-half had gone to Mr. Caldwell ! This was cer-
tainly scandalous , and it was therefore high time that attention
should be drawn to the subject.

It was not supposed that the Chief Justice had given the
matter much consideration , but as pointed out, for each delay an
additional expense was incurred in the shape of fees for at-
(
tendance,' notices, ' etc., all of which fell heavily upon the
losing party. One thing, it was asserted, the Chief Justice The Chinese
and their
could depend upon was, that the Chinese had perfect con- confidence in
fidence in the justice of his decisions, and that, for or against Chief Justice
Hulme.
them , they in all cases preferred his verdict to that of any
inferior officer ; and as for postponements, the uncertainty
was more annoying in many instances than an adverse decision
would be. The Chinese litigants and others not unnaturally
therefore hoped to see in future postponements of cases in Sum-
mary Jurisdiction refused without sufficient cause shown , and
that the Chief Justice as a rule would decide the cases himself
without reference to an arbitrator, even though such arbitrator
were invested with the honorary title of " Protector of Chinese . "
Thus summarized would appear to have been the grievances
against the Supreme Court and the attorneys at this date.
Ordinance No. 3 of 1858 , regulating proceedings in the Supreme Ordinance
Court, by section 14 , however, partly remedied the evils com- No.
s. 14.3 of 1858,
plained of as regards the hearing and postponement of cases in
Summary Jurisdiction . Dissatisfac-
tion res-
In consequence of the dissatisfaction existing in regard to the potinth
pect ofthe
legal profession , as alluded to above, the Attorney- General had legal profes-
sion.
been approached upon the subject by the majority of the barris- The At-
ters in practice in the Colony, and the question of amalgamation torney- Gene
suggested to him as a possible means of appeasing the public ral ap-
proached
mind in a matter wherein they felt the greatest concern . upon the
question of
The following was the letter addressed to Mr. Anstey upon amalgama-
the subject, with his reply to the same :- tion of the
Hongkong, January 8, 1858. profession.
Sir,-We beg to call your attention, as the leader of our profession in this The barris-
Colony, to the dissatisfaction so generally felt and expressed by the com- ter's letter
456 HISTORY OF THE LAWS, ETC. , OF HONGKONG .

Ch. XX § II. munity at the rules which impose separate duties upon barristers and attor-
neys. Practical experience has convinced us that there does not exist here
1858.
as at Home a necessity for the division of the two branches of the profession,
to Anstey
Mr.th
upon e and we are, therefore, willing to give up our peculiar privileges as barristers,
subject. and, by consenting to an amalgamation of the profession, bring about a solu-
tion of the existing difficulty .
We shall be glad to find that you concur with us in our opinion , and should
such prove to be the case, we request you to take such steps as you may deem
necessary for carrying out a measure, which may relieve the community
from a burden which need not be inflicted upon it, and which in no way
raises the character or improves the real interests of the legal profession here.
We have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient servants,
W. T. BRIDGES.
JOHN DAY.
HENRY KINGSMILL.
The Honourable T. C. ANSTEY, Esq.,
H. M.'s Attorney- General,
&c., &c., &c.

Mr. Anstey's Mr. Anstey's reply was as follows :-
reply.
Attorney-General's Office,
Hongkong, January 9, 1858.
Gentlemen, -Your letter of yesterday is before me. I am not aware that
any " dissatisfaction is felt or expressed by the community at the rules which
impose separate duties upon barristers and attornies,"-still less that the
feeling has been " general."
91
In a pecuniary sense, the division of the two branches " of the profession
deserves to be styled by you 66 a burden inflicted upon the community. " But
I need not say that the " burden " may be accompanied with advantage. It
is no small advantage to possess that double check and mutual control which
is the client's security against the occasional incapacity, carelessness, or ex-
tortion of the legal adviser.
Nevertheless, if the advantage be wanting, the burden ought not to be, and,
if the " practical experience " to which you allude shows that, in this Colony,
the client has not the security in question, it is impossible to resist your con-
clusion, that there does not exist here, as at Home, that necessity for " the
division of the two branches," which, as I have said , alone can justify us in
maintaining it.
In that view, I, " as leader of the profession, " incline to accede to the de-
mand which you personally (for Mr. Green's subscription is wanting,) address
to me in that capacity, and , I am quite willing, if both branches concur, to
take some trouble to carry the proposal into effect.
That concurrence is indispensable before I can proceed. It must not be
forgotten that the division which it is now your purpose to obliterate was the
act of one of yourselves : arising immediately from the demand of exclusive
audience for the bar, made by a barrister, and ordered by the Court.*
Therefore, if I proceed without the concurrence of the other branch, it will
be not unfairly said, that the profession has been divided for the sake of the
bar alone, and is now to be re-amalgamated in the same interest, and that the
rights and feelings of that respectable body, the other branch of it, are thus
made the victims of the cupidity and caprice of the branch to which you and
I belong .

Undoubtedly this had reference to Dr. Bridges application to the Court in 1831 ,
immediately after his admission to the local bar. Mr. Anstey did not come to the Colony
till long after, but with his acuteness he must have found this out afterwards. See ante
Chap. XII. § II , p. 302.
 PROPOSED AMALGAMATION OF BARRISTERS AND ATTORNEYS . 457


I shall consequently feel obliged by your attendance at a meeting of the Ch. XX § II.
profession at large. With the Governor's sanction, I hope to be able to con-
1858.
rene that meeting by Notification in to-day's Gazette.
The subjects to be discussed will naturally embrace –
1. The propriety of the suggested change ;
2. The practical method of effecting it ;
3. The future status of the two branches ;
4. The mode of securing the expected advantage to the community ;
5. The precautions to be taken for its protection against wrong ;
And whatever topics are incidental to these. I shall be glad to hear your
further views if you have any to offer.
I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, your most obedient servant,
T. CHISHOLM ANSTEY,
Attorney- General.
The Hon. W. T. BRIDGES, Esq., D.C.L.
JOHN DAY, Esq.
HENRY KINGSMILL , Esq.

The above correspondence Mr. Anstey considered it his duty The corres
to communicate to the Hongkong Law Society, and the follow- pondence
communi-
ing is the letter which the Secretary to the Society addressed to cated by Mr.
Anstey to the
the Attorney-General in reply :- Law Society.
Hongkong, 11th January, 1858. The reply of
the Secretary
Sir, —I am instructed by the Hongkong Law Society to acknowledge and to the Law
thank you for your communication to us of the contents of the letter of Society.
Messrs . Bridges, Day, and Kingsmill to you, dated the 8th instant, and of
your reply of the 9th instant.
The Society denies altogether the truth of the allegation that dissatisfac-
tion is generally, if at all, felt or expressed by the community at the rules
which impose separate duties on barristers and attornies, but on the contrary
asserts, that such separation is approved of, and is beneficial to, the com-
munity ; and that as much necessity exists in Hongkong for the division of
the two branches as at Home, and perhaps a greater. The Society dissents
entirely from the amalgamation , for reasous which will, if necessary, be fully
stated ; and trusts that no proposition , having that object, will be entertained
by you with a view to legislation on the subject.
I have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient servant,
EDWARD K. STACE ,
Secretary to the Honghong Law Society.


Accordingly a meeting of the two branches of the profession
was decided upon, and the Attorney- General issued the following
notice which appeared in The Government Gazette: ----
NOTICE.
The Attorney-General requests the attendance of all the members of either
branch of the legal profession at the Court House, on Tuesday next, the
12th instant, at the hour of noon, to take into consideration a certain pro-
posal which has been laid before him, affecting the relative positions in future
of barristers and solicitors within this island.
Attorney-General's Office,
Hongkong, 9th January, 1858 .
* See antè Chap. xv.. pp. 353, 354,
458 HISTORY OF THE LAWS , ETC. , OF HONGKONG.

Ch. XX § II. Pursuant to the foregoing notice, the meeting was held in
-
1858. the Court House on Tuesday, the 12th January, at noon,
Meeting of
the two bran- there being present, Mr. Anstey, the Attorney- General, Dr.
ches of the Bridges, the acting Colonial Secretary, Messrs. Day and
profession.
Kingsmill, barristers ; and Messrs. Gaskell, Parsons, Stace,
Cooper Turner, and Moresby, solicitors. A letter was handed
in from Mr. Green to the effect that he was too unwell to
attend, but he, while admitting the necessity for a change
of some kind, dissented from the proposal of his learned
brethren.



The following is a condensed report of the proceedings at this
meeting, taken from the records of the time, and which cannot
fail to enlist the utmost interest :-

Mr. Anstey The Attorney-General, having been requested to take the chair, invited the
in the chair. discussion of the questions for which the meeting was summoned .

Dr. Bridges said that he did not understand that there was to be any dis-
cussion, still less that any decision by vote was to be come to, and as the
bar would plainly be out-voted, he should withdraw if any question were put
to the vote.

The Attorney -General observed that it was clearly intended that discus-
sion should take place, his letter of the 9th instant expressly using the word
' discussed ' and stating the subjects.

Mr. Gaskell moved the following resolution :-" That there does exist here
as at Home a necessity for the division of the two branches of the profession."
He observed that the attorneys were also notaries, and that it was desirable
that the two branches of the profession, whose functions were essentially
different, should be kept distinct. The attorney's time was fully occupied in
the numerous details of a general practice, and he had not time to acquire
that knowledge which was requisite for discharging properly the business of
a barrister.

Dr. Bridges said that the business of attorney and barrister had been car-
ried on most satisfactorily in this Colony by one gentleman ; and he knew
an instance in which great injury was done to a client because etiquette pre-
vented the solicitor advocating his case before the Court.
Mr. Parsons seconded Mr. Gaskell's resolution . In answer to Dr. Bridges
he said that exceptions only proved the rule. " In the multitude of coun-
sellors there was safety." Historical evidence was entirely in favour of the
division of the two branches. The only countries where British law, or
what was analogous, prevailed , in which nominally an amalgamation of the
two branches had been made, were the United States and Canada, but prac-
tically there was the same division of labour there as here ; a lawyer was
called counsellor and attorney. But in fact one set of men devoted themselves
to counsellor's business and another to attorney's business. He denied that
the community here desired the amalgamation and contended that it would be
an injury to them . Doubtless it was a burden to have to pay two lawyers
instead of one, but was not the advantage more than commensurate- two
heads were better than one, and the mutual check tended to greater security

A quotation from Prov. XI. 14 ; XXIV. 6.

1
 PROPOSED AMALGAMATION OF BARRISTERS AND ATTORNEYS . 459


as well as greater accuracy. If the amalgamation were effected unprincipled Ch. XX § II .
-
barristers might go into partnership with unprincipled attorneys, and instead 1858.
of the mutual check there would be a mutual combination to pluck the com-
munity. Again, it was a benefit to the Colony to have a periodical infusion
of lawyers from Home, which the amalgamation would tend to impede. A
barrister would not come to lower his rank ; an attorney would not come to
compete with a barrister in a branch which he had never learned and for
which he was not educated . But, assuming that a fusion of the two branches
took place, could an equality be established ? The bar offered to give up its
privileges, but could it give up its privileges ? It had a status here as else-
where which no Oriinauce could disturb. Would the offices of Chief Justice,
Attorney-General, Colonial Secretary , or Chief Magistrate be open to the
attorneys ? Assuredly not. The attorneys in full confidence had introduced
barristers to their clients, as possessing superior qualifications, not supposing
that they were thus furnishing clients to the barristers to their own loss,
which would be the case if the amalgamation took place ? Again, would
the barrister put off his gown and bands, or would the attorney assume those
habiliments ? Would the barrister consent to be disbarred ? He had merely
glanced at some of the effects of an amalgamation, the meeting would readily
work out the result into such details as would plainly show that a great
social evil , would be caused by destroying the existing division of the two
branches . But the public interest was paramount, and if the opinion of the
community were clearly expressed upon a plain case, stating the advantages
and disadvantages of analgamation, of course, the profession must give way
and fight for their living as best they might, or evacuate a Colony which
had no further occasion for their services. With these observations he left it
to the meeting to determine the question raised by Mr. Gaskell's resolution.

Mr. Day said that Mr. Parsons appeared to be under a misapprehension
that the bar wished to injure the attorneys ; such was far from being the
case ; the bar had been continually assailed by the public press as being the
cause of ruinous law expenses, and in vindication of themselves they came
forward and said we will waive our privileges as barristers, if you place all
on the same footing . They considered that the attorneys would be benefited .
He (Mr. Day) was placed in an auomalous position ; he had always acted on
strict professional etiquette, and would not receive instructions except through
an attorney. Repeatedly he had refused briefs direct from the merchant, the
consequence was that he heard no more of them, they having been accepted
by his less scrupulous professioual brethern. He did not wish for an amal-
gamation, but he did wish for an arrangement by which all should act on one
principle.

Mr. Kingsmill did not wish to interfere with attorneys ' business , much of
which he would rather not be compelled to do.

Dr. Bridges, barrister and acting Colonial Secretary, said that , it did not
follow, because an attorney offered a retainer of only ten dollars, that it was
offered on behalf of his client....

The Attorney-General thought that every gentleman of the bar was bound
to assume that it was so offered. Else it would be necessary for the barrister
to go to the client, behind the attorney's back, and say, “ Sir , did you author-
ize your attorney to offer me only what the Ordinance allows him to offer ? "
A question which no gentleman would put. While on this subject he (the
Attorney-General ) would say in reference to Mr. Day's observation on the
odium excited by the indolence and rapacity, real or imaginary, of the profes-
sion, that the profession had it in their power to remove all just cause of
complaint without resorting to the doubtful measure of amalgamation. There
was, in the first place, that remedy which lay within the reach of every man,
460 HISTORY OF THE LAWS , ETC. , OF HONGKONG .

Ch. XX § II . to work conscientiously, not to be exacting overmuch. Let the bar in parti-
cular make that their rule. Let them endeavour to obey the Ordinance,
1858.
instead of setting themselves contumaciously to withstand it. If the law
says that $ 10 shall be the retaining fee, why extort $25 from client and
attorney." He (the Attorney-General) did not preach what he did not
practise. At all events it was preposterous, he thought, for gentlemen, who
disdained to follow his example, to seek any other way to the contentment
of the public expectation.
In the next place, however, if change there must be, he thought that some-
thing far short of amalgamation would meet the exigency. He was quite
prepared , if the attorneys wished it, to propose that the client--if he so
thought fit- might have audience in Court through his attorney. Further than
this he did not at present like to go, at any rate not to the length of the pro-
position before the meeting as to which, by the way, he had received since
the chair was taken, a letter from Mr. Green of this bar expressing his repug-
nance to it. It was, indeed, a most dangerous one ; nor ought it to be adopted
without ample securities against oppression and fraud. It would be necessary,
for instance, to declare barristers incompetent to form professional partnerships
inter se or with attorneys. Their fees must be subjected to taxation, like
attorneys' costs. Double fees or costs must be prohibited , etc., etc. , and,
when all was done, it would still be found that, then as now, your real reformer
is he who reforms himself.
The Acting Colonial Secretary (Dr. Bridges) said that he did not care
what the Ordinance said-- he meant to draw his $25 retainer ; $ 10 would not
suit him. The Ordinance merely said that more should not be allowed on
taxation. He had obtained the opinion of the Chief Justice that he was
right.
Mr. Gaskell observed that the same Ordinance having abolished the dis-
tinction of acts as between party and party, and as between solicitor and
client, it followed that if Dr. Bridges were to have his way, the $ 15 dis-
allowed on taxation of his retaining fee would have to come out of the attor-
ney's pocket.
Dr. Bridges made no answer, but rose to leave the meeting.
The Attorney- General then put the resolution which was carried nem.
con., the barristers not voting against it, and the attorneys being unanimous in
favour of it.
The thanks of the meeting having been presented to the Attorney- General,
that gentleman left the chair and the meeting broke up.

The result of Taken in conjunction with the agitation for amalgamation
the meeting . which again sprung up in May, this year, undoubtedly as one
Ordinance result of this meeting, Ordinance No. 3 of 1858 regulating pro
No. 3 of 1858, ceedings in the Supreme Court and which, inter aliâ, dealt with
Ordinance taxation of costs , and Ordinance No. 12 of 1858 " for Practi-
No. 12 of
1858. tioners in Law, " promulgated and passed on the 22nd March and
12th July respectively, must be considered as having been meant
as a possible or partial remedy of the evils complained of. ‡
* In regard to this point, it may be mentioned that a summons in chambers was
taken out by the barristers calling upon the solicitors to show cause why they should not
pay the sum of $25 retaining fee instead of $10. It came on for hearing before the Chief
Justice on the 7th January. After hearing Dr. Bridges and Mr. Parsons contrà, the Chief
Justice suggested the matter should be referred to the Law Society, and the matter stood
adjourned sine die. On this subject see also antè Chap. XII. § II., p. 309, and Ordinance
No. 14 of 1856, sch. II.
infrè.
+ Chap. XXII.,
+ See further Vol . 11., Chap. XXXVII., as to Ordinance No. 12 of 1858.
 MR. ANSTEY UPON THE REDUCTION IN CRIME . 461


On the evening of Tuesday, the 26th January, the shop of Mr. Ch. XX
- § II.
Glatz , watchmaker in Queen's Road, was the scene of a dreadful 1858.
murder, the victim being a young French boy named Hyacinthe Robbery murder inand
Glatz , the adopted son of Mr. Glatz , who was thirteen or fourteen the shop of
years old and who had been left in charge of Mr. Glatz's shop . On Mr. Glatz,
the latter's return after a short absence from his shop , he found watchmaker.
the boy in a back room dead with his throat cut . The shop had
been plundered of watches, rings, and other articles ofjewellery
to the value of several thousand dollars . Suspicion fell upon Capture of
the shop coolic , Look Ah Song, who had disappeared . By the Look Ah
murderer,
exertions of the Police the murderer was shortly afterwards Song.
captured in Macao and brought back.


At the opening of the Criminal Sessions on Friday, the 29th
January, the Attorney-General. Mr. Anstey, rose and said he
had to inform the Court that the murderer of the unfortunate
French boy had been captured and was then before the Coroner's
jury, that he had acknowledged himself guilty, and that he intend-
ed to adhere to that acknowledgment and plead guilty at his trial
in the Supreme Court. The Attorney- General proposed , with His
Lordship's permission, to arraign the prisoner at the bar of the
Court that day, and he had therefore taken the liberty , without
consulting His Lordship, to draw an indictinent . The verdict
of the Coroner's jury would be delivered in about an hour, and
the indictment would go upon that. The Attorney - General Interesting
further said that this would add nothing to the labours of the speech
Mr. Anstbyey
Session which, he was happy to say, would be a very short one, upon the
state of crime
as it consisted , excluding the case of murder, of only four cases. in the
It would be in His Lordship's recollection that the Sessions had Colony.
been very light for some time past ; -the circumstance had also
attracted his (the Attorney- General's ) particular attention , and
he was particularly struck with the very small number of cases of
piracy, which formerly constituted the bulk of the calendar. On
this he ( Mr. Anstey) put himself in communication with the
proper authorities, and he was furnished with the following
facts during the first eight months of last year one hundred
and ten cases of piracy had been reported to the Police- in the
last four months of the same year, only eighteen cases had been
reported . During the first eight months fifty- two prisoners
were in custody charged with piracy, while during the last four
months only nine prisoners were so charged. The numbers Attorney-
General con-
spoke for themselves ; but he felt bound to congratulate the gratulates the
Court upon
Court on this happy result, as it would be in His Lordship's reduction of
recollection that early in September, the first of the four last piracy
and cases
attri-
months, Ma Chow Wong, "the notorious putter up of piracies, butes same to
had been tried and convicted , to which the decrease was in a conviction of
Ma Chow
great measure attributable.' As regards the latter fact undoub- Wong.
462 HISTORY OF THE LAWS , ETC. , OF HONGKONG .


Ch . XX § II. tedly Mr. Anstey was correct, for this blow had cut off the
1858. scheming head without which the members were powerless .

Conviction On being arraigned, Look Ah Song, as announced by the
and execu-
tion of Look Attorney-General, pleaded guilty. The hief Justice remanded
Ah Song.
the prisoner till next day ( the 30th ) when he was brought up
for sentence . Mr. Hulme observed that he had carefully read