PAPERS MOVED FOR. (Hansard, 12 July 1859)

§ MR. EDWIN JAMES

in rising to move for Copies of certain Papers relative to Hong Kong, said it would be necessary to make a few remarks, in order to render intelligible to the House the grounds upon which he asked for the production of the Correspondence. Mr. Chisholm Anstey having been appointed Attorney General of Hong Kong, arrived in the island in January, 1856. On his arrival at Hong Kong, Sir John Bowring was Governor; Mr. Caldwell was the Registrar General and Protector of Chinese, and a justice of the peace; Dr. Bridges was Colonial Secretary, and a member of the Executive Council. Mr. Anstey had no very agreeable prospect of the duties before him, for two days after his arrival Sir John Bowring intimated to him the corrupt state of the island, and claimed his support in stemming the tide of corruption. In July, 1857 a young American was tried for piracy at Hong Kong. The trial was described in an interesting letter by Mr. Wingrove Cooke, who was then the correspondent of The Times in China. This young American was not like the Corsair of Byron. He was a young and amiable man with no beard upon his cheek. As he stood pleading for his life, he made distinct charges of complicity in piratical expeditions against Mr. Caldwell, the Registrar General of the colony, who was alleged to be in partnership with Machow Wong, a species of Chinese Jonathan Wild. Mr. Anstey, as Attorney General, conducted that trial, and in consequence of the charges incidentally made against Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Anstey, on the 13th of May, resigned the justiceship of the peace. The letter communicating this resignation was the first paper for which he asked. In this letter Mr. Anstey stated the grounds upon which he resigned, and alluded to the charges made against Mr. Caldwell by the young American. An inquiry was directed by Sir John Bowring to be made 1058 into the charges against the authorities of Hong Kong, and on the 20th of May a Commission was issued to certain authorities at Hong Kong, directing them to inquire whether there was any ground for these charges. The Commission found that certain charges were proved and established, and that Mr. Caldwell had been a partner in a lorcha, which had gone on a piratical expedition under the command of Machow Wong. There was no proof that he had shared the plunder, although it was proved that he shared the complicity of fitting out the lorcha upon that expedition. Now, as the Government of this country had gone to war with China on the question of a lorcha this transaction necessarily excited a great deal of interest in the colony. Machow Wong was afterwards indicted and convicted of piracy, and sentenced to transportation, although, through the influence of Mr. Caldwell, he was detained in the colony a year befere the sentence was carried into effect. He had also to move for the papers in the case of "The Queen v. Tarrant," tried at the November sessions (1858) of the Hong Kong Supreme Court. The statements in the report of the Commission led the editor of the Friend of China to publish an attack upon the Government of Hong Kong, in which he charged the Government and Mr. Caldwell with surpressing certain papers found in the possession of Machow Wong. These papers were said to be burnt, and the editor of the Friend of China made a manly and straightforward charge against Mr. Caldwell of having suppressed these papers. A criminal information was filed in November against Mr. Tarrant, of the Friend of China, who justified that statement on the ground that it was true, that it was published for the common good, and that the Government had suppressed the papers. The case was tried by a special jury of bankers and merchants. The jury found that the justification was true, a verdict was given in Mr. Tairant's favour, and the Government were condemned to pay the costs. Mr. Anstey, shortly before that trial of "The Queen v. Tarrant," received an intimation that he was suspended from his office of Attorney General, and that suspension was fully confirmed by the Colonial Government at home. As a matter of justice to an individual and for the sake of the proper administration of justice in [the Colonies, he hoped there would be no objection to the production of the papers.

§ MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, he did not understand it to be the object of the hon. and learned Gentleman to raise any discussion on the subject, as that could only take place satisfactorily after the papers which were now called for had been placed before the House. The question raised by the hon. and learned Member was twofold in its nature, and he thought these two questions ought to he kept distinct. One was with regard to the propriety of Mr. Chisholm Anstey's suspension from the office of Attorney General of Hong Kong, and of its confirmation by the late Government; and the other was with regard to the grave and serious charges against Mr. Caldwell and other officials in the colony. The Governor and Executive Council had suspended Mr. Anstey from the office of Attorney General, and the late Secretary of State for the Colonies had confirmed the suspension. No doubt the Government had refused to communicate to Mr. Anstey the grounds upon which that decision was arrived at, because they could not do so without, in fact, com- 1060 municating the despatch of the Secretary of State to the Governor of Hong Kong. If Mr. Anstey had remained in the colony, no doubt that despatch, or its substance, would have been communicated to him; but he had left, and it was thought not advisable to communicate it to him in the absence and behind the back of the Governor. Sir John Bowring had, however, now arrived in this country, and his noble Friend at the head of the Colonial Office was now ready to convey the substance of the despatch to Mr. Anstey, and to receive any observations which he might have to make upon it. With respect to the charges brought by Mr. Anstey against other officials at Hong Kong, and especially against Mr. Caldwell, the late Government were of opinion that the graver and more serious portion of those charges had broken down before the Commission of inquiry; but at the same time they felt that quite enough had been disclosed in the course of the inquiry not only to warrant, but to require, a strict and searching investigation to be conducted upon the spot. In that view the present Government concurred. A new Governor was about to proceed to Hong Kong—a gentleman who had already done good service in another colony, but was entirely unconnected with Hong Kong or with any of the quarrels which had unfortunately arisen, and a new Attorney General, Mr. Adams, will also soon arrive there. The Governor would be instructed to institate a rigorous inquiry into the whole system at Hong Kong, and into the conduct of the parties against whom charges had been brought. He trusted this would be satisfactory to the hon. and learned Gentleman. With respect to the papers, the Secretary of State for the Colonies had no wish to keep back from the public anything which could throw a light upon all these transactions, hut his noble Friend had yet found it utterly impossible to make himself master of the whole mass of correspondence. His noble Friend was, however, prepared to give all information which a sense of public duty would allow, and he (Mr. Fortescue) would undertake to communicate with the hon. and learned Gentleman within a fortnight as to what papers should be produced. Under these circumstances he hoped he would withdraw his Motion for the present.