90
should be deleted so that persons in charge of vehicles other than those drawn by horses might be included.
The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE did not agree with the suggestion. He added that the vehicles referred to were trucks and trollies, which were sometimes laden with loads which were light but bulky, and it was really an impossibility that every person behind such a vehicle should have the view of what was directly in front
The HARBOUR MASTER-The Honourable Captain Superintendent of Police is quite right in saying I refer chiefly to trollies. I think they are most dangerous. I come across them near my office ou a steep hill with a load probably some eight feet above the wheels. The trolly is guided by a man who is behind and who cannot possibly see where he is going. It is drawn by six or eight men with ropes, who do not care how the thing goes. They let it go down as it pleases, and I think that is a great danger.
His EXCELLENCY-As a matter of fact do these men who pull at the rope let it run down-bill?
The HARBOUR MASTER-They do not guide it. It is 1-ft with the man behind, who cannot see where it goes to. Sometimes a man walks by the side and directs the man behind.
AND
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS. A
The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE -As a matter of fact, in compiling my official report last year I looked through the records of accidents oa used by trollies and other vehicles in the streets, and I think there are less of such accidents in this city than there are in any other city of the same size. The accidents caused by trollies last year reached the "large" total of two.
His EXCELLENCY put the matter to the vote with the result that four (Major-General Goscoigne, the Hon. Wei A Yak, the Hou. E. R. Balilios, and the Harbour Master) voted for the words in question to be left out, the rest of the Council (with the exception of His Excell. enoy, who did not vote) being against.
With regard to the amendment proposed by the Attorney-General to clause 8-substituting for the word "person" the words “member of the police force"-some objection was raised by the ACTING COLONIAL SECRETARY and Dr. HO KAL
His EXCELLENCY-I have just been asking the Attorney-General what has been the com- mon practice here. It strikes me that if a man does you a personal damage you have the right to detain him until a policeman comes. Other. wise a man might take my coat and tear it up and walk away because there was no policeman standing by..
The ACTING COLONIAL SECRETRAY-Í mg; gest we should delete the words "any person who shall see such offence committed" aud mb. stitute " any member of the police force.”
This was agreed to and the Bill passed through the committee stage.
THE LAW RELATING TO SOLICITORS, The second reading of the Bill entitled An Ordinance to amend the law relating to Solici- tors of the Supreme Court was on the Orders of the Day, but the ACTING ATTORNEY-GENERAL asked that it might be postponed so that he might consider certain suggestions made by the Judges of the Supreme Court which had been handed to him only the day before.
ADJOURNMENT,
|February 4, 1899.
8.-Was the said William Chatham the thorised agent of the defendant to issue rtifi. cates to the plaintiff in respect of ork done on Beaconsfield so as to bind defendant by such. certificates?
9. Is the defendant estopped by his payment to the plaintiff of $6,500 on, a certificate issued. by the said William Chatham from denying
(a.) That the plaintiff was employed in his name on his behalf.
(b.) That the said William Chatham, was en, titled to give certificates in favour of the plain- tiff so as to bind the defendant, or
(c) That the authority given to the Public Works Department was exceeded.
10.—Were the repairs and alterations to Bea-
The Council then adjourned until Wednes. consfield in excess of those authorised by the day, February 8th..
SUPREME COURT.
30th January.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE SIR JOHN CARRINGTON (CHIEF Justice) and a SPECIAL JURY.
HOK V. BELILIOS.
In this case (adjourned from December 6th) A Hok, of 23, D'Aguilar Street, contractor, sought to recover from the Hon. E. R. Belilios the sum of $11,200, being the balance of money dua for work done, and materials provided, by the plaintiff on a building belonging to the defendant which is known as Beaconsfield, lately in the occupation of Messrs. Butterfield and Swire.
The following are the issues :----
1.- (a.) Did the defendant agree with the Government to put Beaconsfield in thorough repair and to make all such alterations in it as
the Government might require to fit it for the use of certain departments of the Government ?:
or
(b.) Did defendant agree with the Government to put Beaconsfield in tenentable repair, and to make certain definite alterations therein which had already been pointed out and agreed.on
3. If the agreement between the defendant and the Government was in the first instance limited as to the extent of the repairs and The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE alterations (as in issue No. 1b), or as to the -I think it will be better for the clause to read amount of expenditure thereon (as in issue No. "any member of the police force." It will be), or in both such respects, did the defendant by his subsequent conduct cause the Public much safer.
Works Department or the plaintiff reasonably to believe, and did the said Department or the plaintiff so believe, that the defendant had waived his right to insísit on such limitation in both or either of such respects !
The HARBOUR-MASTER-I suggest it should be" any police officer on his own observation or on the application of any person who shall see the offence committed."
His EXCELLENCY (to the Captain Superin- tendent of Police)-Would it not be the duty of the constable to detain any person and get his name and address in the case of any complaint being made to him ♬
The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE Yes, sir, it would., HIS EXCELLENCY-Then what is the neces- sity of this?
The Hon. Dr. Ho KAI suggested that the amendment should be withdrawn.
The ACTING ATTORNEY-GENERAL-I do not think I should withdraw the amendment; it. would be dangerous.
defendant, and if so to what extent ?
11-Were the repairs and alterations. to Beaconsfield carried out in an unnecessarily ex pensive manner and with unecessarily expensive materials and if so what is the extra cost there- by occasioned.
12.-(a) Were the repairs and alterations to Beconsfield completed on or about the 19th day of January, 1898, as is alleged by the de- fendant in his answer? or
(b) Were the said repairs and alterations completed on or about the beginning of March, 1898, as is alleged by the plaintiff in his petition ?
13: Did the plaintiff execute repairs and alterations to Beaconsfield to the value, of $17,000, and is a balance of $11,200 or some other and what sum due by the defendant to the plaintiff, in respect thereof.
Mr. Pollock (Acting Attorney-General), in- stracted by Mr. H. L. Dennys, appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Francis, Q.C. (instructed by Messre. Wilkinson and Grist) for the de- fondant.
The following composed the special jury -- Messrs. R. Marten (foreman), H. M. Mehta, J. S. Van Buren, Walter Foate, W. R. Lonley, W. Hatton Potte, and C. A. Tomes, rebus
20
Mr. Pollock said that in view of the long ad- journment of the case it would be convenient if he started from the beginning of the salon, although the jury might possibly have to a ver tain extent in their minds something of what he said to them in his previous opening. In August 2. If the latter, was the expenditure on the 1897, Mr. Belillos, who was then about to lose said repairs and alterations limited by the de his old tenants of Beaconsfield, Messrs. Batter fendant to a sum of $6.000 or thereabouts, and field and Swire, was anxious to get the Govern if so was such limit assented to by the Government to be his tenants is Beaconsfield. In the... first instance he approached the Government- ment?
through Mr. Stephens, solicitor, writing to Mr. Lockhart, Colonial Segretary, proposing a rental of $400 a month, pointing out that Beaconsfield would be suitable for the nse and occupation of certain Government : departments, and attempting to show that that would be an economical arrangement for the Government and obviate the necessity of erect- ing expensive public offices. In answer to that letter Mr. Lockhart wrote on the 4th September declining the offer. Mr. Belilios was appar- ently anxions to get the Government as tenants - of Beaconsfield, for they found him again in- structing Mr. Stephens to communicate with the Government. On September 7th, 1897, Mr. Stephens again, wrote Mr. Lockhart, the following words occurring, in this letter, "I am to add that Mr. Balilios will cause the house to be thoroughly done up both inside and out and adapted to the purpose required.” to bear in mind, because there was a sugges- That was an important olsuse for the jury
tion made by defendant in his, answer that the premises were to be put merely into a state of tenantable repair, but they would... see that quite early in the correspondance Mr.. Belilios agreed that the premises (should i be thoroughly done up both inside and out--not merely put into a state of tenantabla repairs.
4.-Did the defendant, either expressly or impliedly, agree to pay for repairs and altera tions according to the scale of charges for such work subsisting between the Government and the contractors ?-
5.-(a) Did the defendant, either expressly or impliedly, authorize the Public Works Depart ment to enter into any controt in his name or other person to execute repairs and alterations on his behalf. with the plaintiff or with any to Beaconfield, or
(b) Did the defendant only, anthorize the Public Works Department, by themselves, their servants or agents, to execute repairs and
alterations to Beaconsfield?
12
The CAPTAIN SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE In the existing law dealing with vehicles and so forth-14 of 1845 the power is vested in the police officers of the colony. If a man is knocked down by a rickahs he accom- such department, employ the plaintiff to exe- and also adapted to the purpose required. On
panies the coolie to the nearest constable and gives him into custody. I do not think any necessity has yet arisen or been shown, for. giving these exceptional powers to the general public, and I think it is undesirable in this colony, where you hare a large number of nationalities, and especially some who are by no means disinclined to exercise, a good deal more power than they have any right to. I refer to the Chinese, who are very fond of taking upon themselves power which really belongs to the police.
{
6. (a) Did the Public Works Department through one William Chatham, an officer of
cute repairs and alterations to Beaconsfield in the name or on behalf of the defendant Por
(b) Did the Public Works Department through the said William Chatham direct the plaintiff to execute repairs and alterations to Beaconsfield on behalf of the Department as
their employé ?
7.-Was the plaintiff at the date of the com- mencement of the repairs, and alterations to Beaconsfield in the employ of the Public Works, Department as their contractor to execute re- pairs and alterations to publico buildings ?
the 1st of October, 1897, Mr. Chatham) wrpte saying that he had visited Beaconsfield with. Mr. Lockhart and others and that it would. probably suit the Government, to take it on a lease for three years with the option of renewal, Mr. Chatham added that it was the subject of general remark that the building much out of repair and would require. great deal done to it. Ultimately an agree come to between the defendant and the ment for the lease by the defendant Government for three years of Besconsfeld,
was
་བ་ -