462
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PREÉS AND
His Lordship-Nothing improper is being done now. You want your point brought out and you will not wait.
Mr. Francis-I did not want my point brought out at once. I simply wanted the point made clear. I want a sensible question
to be asked.
His Lordship You have a very bad habit of intervening and I have spoken to you about it
before.
Mr. Francis-It is simply in aid of the Court, my Lord.
His Lordship-It produces ill temper and interrupts the business of the Court.
Mr. Francis-I am sorry your Lordship thinks so.
His Lordship-Please do not interrupt again. You exercise your right in cross-examination very fully.
a
that contention be set up the position that the community would not have required so large a site as that and that a portion of it would have been quite sufficient, Particulars were given to show that a much smaller or similar building would be sufficient for the pur- poses of a synagogue. His Lordship thought evidence could be given of the dimensions of the present synagogue with a view to showing it was sufficient. It would have a bearing on the case, but not much.
Witness, continuing, said-The present syna- gogue is a two storey building, 50 feet 6 inches long and 30 feet wide.
On resuming after luncheon Mr. Danby was cross-examined by Mr. Francis.
Witness-After I had made my estimate of $5,000 for the retaining wall Mr. Orange wrote to me saying he wanted the level 20 feet above Continuing, witness said-After some discus- the Kennedy Road. The dimensions of the build- sion the Committee came to the conclusion that ing fixed upon at the meeting were 70 feet by an area shown on Mr. Orange's plan was too 70 feet. When I applied for the lower lot we large. According to that plan the large room of
wished to ascertain what was the price of that the synagogue was to be of the same dimensions land; we were not then thinking of buying the as St. George's Hall and a ten feet verandah outside that. A discussion also arose as to the upper lots. In April or May, 1896, I went with Mr. Chater and. Mr. Hooper to see a compass bearing of the synagogue with respect lot further along Kennedy Road. After- to Jerusalem. After further details had been
wards they turned round and pointing to the discussed a piece of ground was taken off lot
upper lots Mr. Chater said, This is the lot 1,382 above, and Mr. Belilios offered no ob.
we must apply for." I said Mr. Belilios jection. The site for the synagogue was then had told me to apply for it and Mr. Chater carefully calculated as being 24,455 square feet, asked me if I had done so. I said 1 had not but costing $3,668.20. Mr. Orange then asked
that I onght to have done so. On the following Mr. Belilios if he was going to charge inter-morning I told Mr. Belilios I was going to
apply, and I did so.
Mr. est, and
Belilios said he did not think so.
Mr. Orange replied that it was very generous of him. I was then told to work out the design and the exact area and Crown rent. The Crown rent was to be pro ruta and the price agreed upon was 15 cents per square foot. The Crown rent was not disputed. When that was settled I reminded the gentle. men present that a high retaining wall would have to be built and I wanted to know who was going to pay for it. Mr. Belilios said he would pay half cost. I think it was Mr. Raymond who asked if I could give them an idea as to the cost and I told them I could not tell without getting out detailed sections. They pressed me for a figure and I said probably from $1,000 to $2,000, but it was impossible to say for certain. I think I then asked Mr. Orange at what level he intended to have the plateau for the synagogue. He said his intention was to have it higher than the level of the tramway, so that the sengers going up and down the tramway could not see into the synagogue. Mr. Raymond or another member of the Committee told Mr. Belilios the Committe would give $1,000 towards the cost of the wall. The cost de- pended on the level of the plateau. Mr. Belilios said he would pay half, no matter how much. No agreement was come to at that meeting about the cost of the wall. In my ex- perience extending over twenty-three years there is usually an agreement as to who is to pay such a cost. I worked out the cost and it came to $5,000 at about the level Mr. Orange had suggested, and I wrote to him accordingly. Messrs. Leigh and Orange replied that they wanted the wall 20 feet above the Kennedy
pas-
Road level. I sent for Mr. Silas and ex- plained to him in my office that if they took that level the cost would be very much increased as the foundations would bave to be much deeper. He told me he would go and see Messrs. Leigh and Orange. About three quarters of an hour later I received a second letter from Messrs, Leigh and Orange stating that it would be advisable to lower the
level ten feet. A wall ten feet above the Kennedy Road level would have cost $9,232.85. Mr. Pollock then asked witness to give the dimensions of the present synagogue.
Mr. Francis contended that the question was irrelevant. The pleadings denied that there were any transactions at all and the only intelligible defence set up in the proceedings, but not in the pleadings, was that the defendant contracted to give only a small portion of lot 1,381 and not the whole of it. Therefore the dimensions of the present synagogue had nothing to do with the issue as to whether the defendant bought the Jand on behalf of the Jewish community.
His Lordship said the pleadings denied that the defendant purchased lot 1,381 for the Jewish community in order that it might be the sites for their synagogue, and in order to support
+
Mr. Francis-Is it not a fact that yon pro- posed to apply for the upper lots on behalf of the Land Investment Company and that because Mr. Chater refused to employ yon you went to Mr. Belilios?
per-
Witness--No, certainly not. I acted feetly fair with Mr. Chater.
Did you tell Mr. Chater at what price the Government were going to put up the upper lots I did not know it then.
When was it you got the letter telling you at what price lot 1,381 would be put up? 12th
June.
When did you ask the Government to put up the upper lots at a cheaper rate than the lower one I have not got the date with me.
Did you tell Mr. Chater that the upper lots could be obtained for 15 cents a foot or less P-
might have doue. Mr. Chater knew as much about the land as I did.
I
Have you anything in your diaries to show when you received definite instructions to apply for the two upper lots? About twenty-five days before the sale of 1,381, and that was after Mr. Belilios told me to apply for it.
-
How long after P-About a week. Was it not before you received those in- structions from Mr. Belilios that you had that conversation with Mr. Chater and Mr. Hooper ?
No. How could I have told Mr. Chater that Mr. Belilios wanted the land if the con- versation took place before?
That is just what we want to get at. Can you tell me what day or days you took to make the surveys for the contours ?-A plan like that takes days to prepare. I received instructions to proceed with the work shortly after the sale. I commenced the work about three weeks after the sale.
Were you taking those sections and levels on Your own account or by Mr. Belilios's in- structions ?-By Mr. Belilios's instructions.
When was the question of the retaining wall mentioned for the first time P-At the meeting of the 15th of March That was the first time Mr. Belilios or the Committee knew of it.
If the whole of 1,381 had been taken by the Jewish community would a retaining wall bave been necessary between that lot and the upper lots P-Yes, in some places.
Would that wall have been as expensive as the one proposed P-No.
[December 16, 1897.
8th December,
The cross-examination of Mr. Danby was continued.
Witness-I produce my dairy. The work of taking sections was commenced on the 17th August, 1896. The work was done by Mr. Harker, my assistant, and the date is recorded in his level book. From my own diary I find I worked on Mr. Belilios's Kennedy Road sits on the 1st and 2nd October, 1896. I worked on it afterwards on and off. I have no entry of the date of the application to the Government for 1,381; that is in my letter book. I have no entry of the date when I received instructions to apply. I have no entries in April of the date of instructions in respect of any of the three lots; I do not enter such matters in my diry. On the 16th June I have the entry, Went with Chater and Hooper over Kennedy Road site." I do not remember writing a let- ter to the Laud Investment Company about 31st July, 1896, in which I expressly stated that Mr. Belilios intended to give lot 1,381 to the Jewish community for a synagogue.
$4
Witness was here asked to send for his letter book.
Mr. Francis Do you remember sending a memorandum containing your statement of the facts to Mr. Belilios or to Mr. Bell Irving, of the Land Investment Company?
Witness-I sent it to Mr. Belilios, but I read it over to Mr. Chater first.
Have you read over that memorandum during the last few days P-No.
Mr. Francis said he had no more questions to ask except in reference to the letter book.
His Lordship said Mr. Danby could be re- examined now and afterwards questioned about
the letter book.
Re-examined,by Mr. Pollock, witness said- This morning I worked ont the approximate a retaining wall between lot 1,381 cost of 344 feet 6 inches long, with an average height and lots 1,382 and 1,383. The wall would be
of 12 feet, and the cost would be about $2,000.
I take the rate at $2.50 per cubic yard, and the
average
thickness five feet.
His Lordship-It seems to be a very cheap wall.
Mr. Francis-It is calculated on the number
of cubic yards. There are about 700 cubic yards, so it is not very cheap, my Lord.
Further questions on technical points were asked and it was decided to reserve them till a
later period to permit of the witness making
certain calculations.
Witness then produced his letter book and in reply to questions by Mr. Francis said he had no
record of a letter written to the Land Invest- ment Company on the 31st July. There was a copy of a letter he wrote to Mr. Belilios forward- ing a memorandum respecting the two upper
lots.
Lordship-I knew By His
a corres- pondence was going in the begin- ning of March between the trustees and
on
Mr. Belilios, but I had no part in it. I was not present at any meeting between them before the 15th March. There was no reference made at the meeting about the taking of the whole or a portion of the lot. I don't recollect that there was any reference to the correspondence. Towards the close of the meeting Mr. Belilios wanted the others to decide there and then whether they would pay half the cost of the wall. Mr. Raymond said that they would take time to con- sider the matter. Mr. Belilios insisted on their
paying half the cost, and said that if they wanted time to consider the matter would be dragging on.
Aaron Solomon Cohen :-I am an exchange and share broker. I have been a member of the Jewish community in Hongkong since 1864 and am the oldest member with the exception of Mr. Belilios. Last year I heard that Mr. Belilios had bought the lot in question in Kennedy Road, and I heard that he intended to give a portion of the ground for the purposes of a synagogue.
Continuing, witness said-At the meeting on the 15th March, during the discussion about the plans, some of those present expressed the His Lordship told Mr. Pollock that the wit- opinion that Mr. Orange's plan gave too muchness's evidence was not very definite. ground and asked if it was intended to provide Witness, cotinning-I have heard that mem- a tennis court for the rabbi. My plan provided bers of the Jewish community did not want for a larger synagogue and less ornamental the land, but they have not told me per- grounds.
sonally. I told Mr. Silas that I heard Mr. The witness's cross-examination was not D. R. Sassoon and Mr. A. J. David did not want the site as it was too public. He said finished when the Court adjourned.