7
October 10, 1895.]
the face of it, it now appears that Liu's degradation is due to a memorial pre sented by the Censor Wu Kuang-kuei. But the half is often more than the whole, and we must be satisfied that our Minister has obtained so much; one good end will be gained if the degradation of Liu really acts as a warning to others and the subordinate officials who are culpable are adequately punished.
F
News of this surrender on the part of the Chinese had reached Nanking early yesterday morning, for we received from our correspondent there early in the morning the following despatch:
Perfect quiet; the British ships have not yet comunicated with the Viceroy's yamen. The British Admirál is hourly expected. The indications are peaceful.".
Admiral Buller leaves for the river this morning in the Alacrity. Now that the affair of Lin Ping-chang is so far settled, we trust that the British Minister and Admiral will turn their attention to Foochow, where the conduct of the Viceroy and his henchman Hsu decidedly requires overhauling.-N. C. Daily News.
f THE BRITISH NAVAL DEMON-
STRATION.
es
F
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
Hon. Ho Kai said the defendant paid $1,000 as security to the firm on being appointed compradore, but afterwards the money was paid into the firm's account, and the plaintiff contended that this money was paid so that defendant should not only share the profits but carry on the business in co-partnership with others. Counsel then read an affidavit sworn to by the defendant, who said that he was not and never was a member of the firm. He paid $1,000 to R. G. Hopkins on 15th December, 1894, as security for the due performance of his duties as compradore to the firm. During January, 1894, he applied to Hopkins for the money, and Hopkins said he had spent the money and could not pay it, but he gave the following acknowledgment: In consideration of your having placed the sum of $1,000 to the credit of our firm, you are hereby entitled to one-seventh of the net profits of the firm in the terms of our partnership agreement." This letter was not, defendant swore in the affidavit, interpreted to him, and he did not understand the true purport of it. He considered he was to receive profits as interest on the money deposited. He had nothing to do with the busi- ness, and was never consulted as to the manage- ment.
Counsel, after reading the affidavit, called a witness to prove that Lau Kow Foo was a partner in the firm.
R. G. Hopkins said he was a partner in. the firm of Hopkins, Cumming and Co. and he managed the business. The other partners were Cumming, alias Chun Yat Po, Lau Kow Foo, the defendant, and Kwong Sui Sing. Lau Kow Foo took one-seventh of the profits, and Kwong Sui Sing a fourteenth, witness two- sevenths, and Chun Yat Po took the rest. The capital was $5,000. Cumming contributed
Shanghai, 30th September. There are at present anchored at Woosung the ironclad Undaunted, the first-class cruiser Edgar, the second-class cruiser Archer, and the third-class cruiser Caroline The despatch vessel Alacrily, flying Admiral Buller's flag, came up to-day. The Centurion (flagship) and another cruiser are hourly expected from Japan. At latest advices the second-class cruiser Lotus was at Kiukiang, the second-$3,500, Lau Ko Foo $1,000, Kwong Sui class cruiser Spartan at Wubi; the first-class Sing $500, and witness put up nothing. The cruiser Rainbow and the first-class gunboat partnership agreement was drawn up between Plover were anchored off Nanking; the second- witness and Chun Yat Po, and he understood class gun-vessel Swift was anchored below the that Lau Kow Foo and Kwong Sui Sing were Centaur buby. The Esk, we believe, is at
also partners and shared the profits. The $1,000 Hankow. The Daphne and Firebrand are at deposited by Lan Kow Foo was put in the bank, present moored off the bund here, and expect but eventually withdrawn by witness to meet to accompany the rest of the fleet to Nanking the firm's liabilities. On the 10th August wit- in a day or two, when the Caroline will take the
ness received the following letter:-"I am in- senior naval officer's buoy. From the forego- structed by Lau Kow Foo to request you to ing list of ships, it will be readily seen that immediately return to me the sum of $1,000 Admiral Buller is evidently on serious business. which he deposited with you on 19th January, Later. 1895, for his partnership share in your business, as he wishes to withdraw from the business.-- Yours truly, K. W. Monnsey." Witness saw Mr. Mounsey three days later and said that the partnership was to be wound up and the $1,000 would be repaid if proper application were made. Mr. Mounsey explained that his wording of the letter was based on what Mr. Hopkins said, not on what Lau Kow Foo said, for "with Lau Kow Fu he spoke in “pigeon English with- out an interpreter and so did not get a reliable statement of the exact position.
The Alacrity, with Admiral Bullér on board, arrived here to-day from Woosung, having come in haste from Japan and will remain till Wednesday, when she proceeds up the Yangtsze to Nanking accompanied by the Caroline; the Daphae, in pursuance of orders to-day received, remaining here for the preseut.. The Edgar and Undaunted are still at Woosung, where the Centurion is expected to-morrow.
The Taotai is in a terrible state of excitement about the gathering of the ships at Woosung and has been calling on the various Consuls to- day, endeavouring to find out what it is all about. He is in constant communication with Nanking, where the officials seem to be thrown into a state of Iudicrous excitement.
The Rainbow and Plover completely cover Nanking only two of the shore guns of which can reach them in their present position.-China Gazette.
SUPREME COURT.
3rd October.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE MB. A, G. WISE (ACTING Puisne
JUDGE.)..
SUL FOOV. LAU KOW FOO.. In this case the plaintiff obtained judgment against the firm of Hopkins, Cumming aud Co. for $390.30, and under sub-section 8 of the Partnership Ordinance he applied in chambers for execution against Lau Kow Foo as partner in the firm. Lau Kow Foo disputed his liability, and therefore the summous was adjourned to the Court for the question to be fought out. Hon. Ho Kai (instructed by Mr. Ho Wyson) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Robinson (instructed by Mr. Mounsey) re- presented the defendant..
In cross-examination by Mr. Robinson, Mr. Hopkins said he was formerly a clerk in Turner and Co. He left them in February, 1894, and started in business alone without any capital. He had a compradore named Un Lai-kon, who remained until October, 1804, and advanced about $700 towards the business. He was not paid at the time of his leaving, because witness could not afford the money. Ng Po-wan succeeded as compradore and deposited $1,000, and advanced $300 towards the business. He left on 4th December, 1894. He was paid the $300, and the deposit money. was put to the credit of the next man; Ko Yung Sang, who advanced a small sum which was paid off, and he was succeeded by Kwong. Sui Sing and Lau Kow Foo, who were joint compradores. An ageement was drawn up on 10th December, 1894, and it was witnessed by A. E. Skools, who was then a clerk in witness's office. The next transaction was the drawing up of the partnership agreement between witness and Chun Yat Po on 19th January last. Kwong Sui Sing discon- tinued his duties as compradore. Lau Kow Foo was really surety for Kwong Sui Sing and did not take any active part in the management of
the business..
The defendant was called by Mr. Robinson and he stated that he was not a partner in the firm, and that the $1,000 was advanced only as security while he was compradore. He had never taken any active part in the management.
267
Hon. Ho Kai, in summing up his case, sub- mitted that it was clear Lau Kow Foo was a partner in the firm. Although he was not a de- clared partner it was the intention of the other members of the firm to treat him as a partner. It was by mutual consent that the $1,000 was transferred to the firm's account.
His Lordship, without calling upon Mr. Robinson, said he had not the slightest doubt that Hopkins thought that Lan Kow Foo was that Lau Kow Foo was actually a partner. On a partner, but his thinking so did not mean the evidence for the plaintiff alone his Lord. ship was inclined to hold that the case was not made out, and on hearing the defendant's case he was strengthened in the opinion that no case whatever had been made out for the plaintiff. The summons would be dismissed with costs.
4th October
CAN POLICEMEN SUE FÓR MONEY LENT? An action was brought by Jewar Singh to recover $120 from S. A. Ramjam. The money was said to be due on a promissory note. Mr. J. Hastings (of Mr. V. H. Deacon's office) appeared for the plaintiff.
The plaintiff was sworn and said he was police- man No. 737.
I think this man is debarred from suing.
His Lordship What about the regulations?
Mr. Hastings-The regulations cannot stop him suing; they are departmental regulations. debar him.
His Lordship--I think the regulations do
Mr. Hastings-The regulations cannot take away the man's right to sue. Under the Ordi-
nance-
heard of a case of this kind for years.
His Lordship-This is the first time I have member a case of this sort coming before Sir I re-
James Russell six or seven years ago.
Mr. Hastings It is a point for the defence
to raise.
gistrar had better, be sent for. How long has His Lordship--I do not think so. The Re-
the plaintiff been in the police force? Perhaps he is going to take his pension.
Plaintiff said he had been in the force 53 years. Mr. Hastings- cannot understand how the regulations can take away the man's right to sue; they might say he will suffer certain penalties if he does sue.
Mr. Sangster, the Registrar. came into Court at this point, and his Lordship said Mr. Sangster, whatever is the result of this case, take this policeman's number and report the matter to the Captain Superintendent. I shall not hear the case now, and I think the plaintiff had better consider his position. He is bound to get dismissed from the force.
Mr. Hastings-I do not know about that, my Lord, but-
His Lordship If he likes to take the risk he can; he runs a great risk. I do not know what course the Captain Superintendent will take, but it is very likely he will dismiss the plaintiff.
Plaintiff, through the interpreter, said the Captain Superintendent had given him permis- sion to sue.
His Lordship-I do not think he has power to do it. Where is the permission?
Plaintiff I made an application to the Captain Superintendent and he has given me sanction.
His Lordship-In writing?
Plaintiff No; they were verbal instructions. His Lordship-I think you had better inquire about that permission.
this man and his employers only.
Mr. Hastings---Surely this is a matter between
His Lordship-Never mind that. nothing to do with the Court.
Mr. Hastings-I submit the regulations have
His Lordship-It has a great deal to do with the Court. If the regulations are in force they, are a part of the law. I shall adjourn this case for a week, and the plaintiff had better consider. his position meanwhile. Of course if he has per- mission you had better produce it as part of your case.
Mr, Hastings-Perhaps your Lordship will let the matter stand over until I have seen the regulations. At present we have nothing before us at all to stop this man suing.
His Lorship-These régulations may be law.