26
Hoey, that they intended no reflection on his honour.
This proceeding having been severely commented on in the Hong Kong Register, one of the local newspapers, by a gentleman, since deceased, who denounced it as something much worse than the corruption imputed to Mr. Butt, by Mr. Roebuck,—Dr. Bridges came down to the Legislative Council, laid the article before them, and obtained a committee of his own nomination, and consisting of his own personal friends of that day, to enquire whether his character for "integrity" was in any way impaired by the circumstances of the case.
Notwithstanding this somewhat narrow limitation of the matters referred to, the Committee, after taking all the evidence, laid on the table their unanimous report, afterwards agreed to by the Council itself, with equal unanimity; from which I extract the following paragraphs.
After expressing their opinion, that, so far as the question of the tenders was concerned, there was nothing in the evidence before them to impeach the honour or honesty of the acting Colonial Secretary; the Committee proceed to recapitulate the circumstances connected with the retainer, and to say:—[1]
"These proceedings, in the opinion of your Committee, show 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 an absence of that proper sensitiveness—which should have made him,
- ↑ Report and Proceedings of the Committee, printed in the Hong Kong Government Gazette of 19th June, 1858.
