that a party who the payment of a bill is liable for all principal would be liable for," includ- ug the payment of interest on the bill, if over. due. I think, therefore, that Cheong Koon Sing, and consequently the defendants, are lial l for the payment of interest on the bills as from the date of their maturity. This question of interest is regulated by sec 57 of the Bills of Exchange Ordinance, 1885. It appears from this enactment that the plaintiffs are not entitled to claim, as they do, both interest and re- exchange, and they must elect on which of these claims they will proceed before the Re- gistrar. It will be seen also from the terms of the enactment that the expenses of noting and protesting ar
are in the same position on this point
as the interest.
It was contended by the defendants that the plaintiffs had accepted the Saigon property, a promissory note for Tls. 10,000, and certain shares as equivalent to cash, and that Cheong Koon Sing's indebtedness was reduced accordingly, I think, however, that they did not succeed in this contention, and that the plaintiffs should only be debited, in respect of these items, with the amounts which they have realized or, with reasonable diligence, ought to have realised. Any securities not yet realized the plaintiffs must either surrender to Cheong Koon Sing, or as he may appoint, or take over absolutely at a valuation to be made by the Registrar.
*1
All reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the plaintiffs in realizing or endeavouring to realise, or in keeping alive, securities delivered to them by Cheong Koon Sing are to be allowed. The accounts are to be taken as on the 22nd September, 1894. All entries relating to the subject-matter of the suit made prior to that date in the plaintiff's books, in the ordinary course of business, are to be deemed binding on the defendants, subject to exception on the ground of fraud or evident mistake. Judgment is to be entered for the amount found to be due to them on the basis of this account, but the total amount is not to exceed $100,000. In. terest at the rate of eight per cent. per annum is to be payable on the principal sum adjudged from the date of the commencement of the suit to the date of judgment.
The taking of the accounts will extend to the dealings of the parties subsequent to the 22nd September, 1804. If this account results in a reduction of the amount for which judgment is entered, interest will abate and execution be issued for a lesser sam accordingly.
If any difficulty arises in settling the accounts, either party is to be at liberty to apply in Cham- -bers for directions. ~
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
Dec
1896
no att
1. Mr
Was dise
Mr. J. J. Francis, QC (instructed J. Hastings), appeared to E. Robinson (instructed by Mr. Moungey defended. |
The defendant pleaded not guilty.
of Sept
one mak
description as
The jurors were-Messrs E. J. Main, Châu | be Tsung Fat, E. Marx, Hung Mak Hoi, A. Howard, F. Kiene, and T. J. de S. Alonco.
Mr. U. F. Harton was called, but the de- fendant objected to him on the ground that he was the acting secretary of the Hongkong Electric Company, by whom the defendant was employed.
His Lordship, allowed the objection.
The names of Messrs H. S. Cooke and P. A Measor were called, but neither gentlemen was in attendance and his Lordship directed them to be ordered to attend before him.
Mr. F. Kiene asked to be excused from serving on the ground that he served on the jury during the whole of Monday, but his Lordship said that that was not a sufficient ground for indulgence to be shown.
E
with anoth to fit box foldered
these discov
arres
se
orr
Fariners
the
of the
volved the
successfully contested proved by persons in the Light Company that the Mr. Raymond was undoub the possibility of “ of the defendant, - and was sent with the letter was Electric Light Company's work structions of the defenda proved that the box from the time it was tal kong to thẻ time-of- What was the natural. act? Mr. Raymond, steamer on receiving the letter naturally sup posed that, coming from a man like Mr. Farmer, it was perfectly true. They would never dre that a man in Mr. attempt such a thing as the smugg into Haiphong. It was considered a very serious offence in Haiphong, punishment not only of the persons smuggling but also of the captain of the ship on which the opinm was smuggled, and it further involved heavy penalties against the vessel. It was an or- dinary custom for coasting steamers to take small parcels, such as photographic plates and articles not of commerce, for a very small charge or, as a favour, for no charge at all from one port to another. It would also be show if it had been known that this parcel con opium it would have been at once returned to the person sending it, to be put on the manifest for freight to be paid." - The" im mediate result of the action of the defendant in writing the letting was seriously to injure Mr. Raymond by exposing him to the risk of arrest and punishment in Haiphong and to the almost certainty of being dismissed his chip and losing his character with all employers on the coast. There was another almost neces sary result arising directly out of the sending of the letter, and that was that Mr. whose name was fixed to the document
mer
Mr. Francis, in explaining the facts, said the defendant was formerly in the employ of the Hongkong Electric Light Company and a Mr. Raymond was the chief officer on board the steamer Hanoi, a vessel under the French flag, trading mainly between Hongkong and Hai, phong. On the 3rd October Mr. Raymond was on board the Hanoi having breakfast in the saloon with the captain and one of the officers when a letter was brought addressed "Captain Raymond with it came a small parcel. The letter was passed to the captain by Raymond and it was opened. The heading on the paper was Madar and Farmer, proprietors, New Victoria Hotel, 9, Queen's Road Central Hongkong, October 3rd, 1890." The letter read as follows-"Dear Captain Raymond May I ask you as a special favour to take the small parcel per bearer to Haiphong It is for M. Jules Paine, proprietor of the Grand Hotel du Commerce. I have written to him to send off for it, so you will have no trouble in taking it ashore. It only contains two doz. photographic plates and two doz. papers.
Thanking you in anticipation The I am, yours fraternally, W. Farmer." only W. Farmer known in the colony is Mr. W. Farmer, who is one of the proprietors of the New Victoria Hotel, and who, so far as the letter and parcel were concerned, had nothing to do with the transaction. The parcel ap. peared to be a small wooden box, about six or seven inches by three or four inches, and it bore a label, from which it was inferred that the box came from a photographic shop in Europe with photographic plates in it. The parcel, unopened and untouched, was put into Reference was not made at the hearing to Mr. Raymond's cabin and taken in the that portion of the prayer, of the plaintiffs' steamer to Haiphong. Haiphong is some little defendant, was at once charged, on petition which asks for an order for the sale distance up the river, and when the Hanoi of the Hanol to Hongkong, with the ver of the premises mortgaged by Cleng Kai to anchored at the mouth of the river waiting for serions offence of having deliberately dec the Bank and the application of the proceeds in the turn of the tide she was closely watched by Mr. Raymond and defrauded, the owners payment of the judgment, and as I feel some & Customs steam launch, which followed the ship. The offence of forgery co difficulty on one or two points connected with
steamer up
the river. On arriving at Haiphong elements, the first being the the making of such an order, I will reserve French Customs officers boarded the steamer doonment a document which, on the fa liberty to the plaintiffs to move the Court for and searched Mr. Raymond's cahin. On open was not what it was made to app
or the such an order, if they desire to do so.
ing the drawer in which the parcel was mere alteration ‘of a placed the officers at once pounced upon the of a figure, in a document would box and said that was what they wanted. Mr. cient to justify a jury in finding Raymond insisted upon its being opened before false document had been made. This
tit it was taken out of the ship and it was accord was essentially a false document, in ingly opened by the Customs officers and by Mr. purported to be signed by a person who Raymond on the ship's deck. Inside the case knew nothing about it and did not sign
it and did not sanction the use was a tin package closely soldered up and con taining not photographic plates or photographic signature. The letter also purported to com paper but two tins of prepared opium: Mr. from a place from which it did not com Raymond was arrested and proceeded against in contained a falsehood in the 3 body the French court, and he was fined $400 for ference to the parcel which was sent smuggling or attempting to smuggle opium But the more making of a fal into Haiphong and he also had to serve five not sufficient in itself to consti days' imprisonment. His sentence was a greater forgery; it must be 'made one, but a portion of it was remitted. On hie fraud; and the main qu return to Hongkong an immediate application consider was whether th was made to M. Farmer, who at once the defendant in making repudiated all knowledge of the letter and oftent to defrand as the parcel. The paper on which the letter was ordinary meaning written was undoubtedly similar to that used at ordinary idea connec the Victoria Hotel, and anyone who went in property or mon there casually for a drink or a game of billiards not the legal iden conld easily get a sheet of it. The matter was put into the bands of the police, and after investigation it was discovered that this letter was undoubtedly and unmistakably in the handwriting of the defendant, who had made
The plaintiffs will have their costs of suit, including the costs of and incidental to the application made by the defendants for the issue of a commission. This order is, of course, without prejudice to the order made by the Court with reference to the costs of the former
trial
Throughout this judgment I have used the torms" the Bank" and "the plaintiffs" in refer- ence to the original plaintiff bank, but it is to be understood that the judgment and execution enure for the benefit of the Bank of China and Japan, Limited, who are now the real plain-
tiffs in the case.
CRIMINAL SESSIONS.;
29th December.
BEFORE HIS Honour Dr. Carrington (CHIEF JUSTICE.)
TRIAL OF MCKINLEY.
Charles McKinley, electrical engineer, was charged on two counts with forging a letter purporting to have been written by Mr. W. Farmer with intent to defraud, and with uttering the letter with intent to defrand.
idea of frand
deceitful means another The
to what was the
he wrote the letter.
og pi
the
Page 10Page 11