March 31, 1900.]
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
4. And by way of further alternative the defendant Bank says that the plaintiff's cause of action (if any) in this suit did not accrue within six years and that such cause of action (if any) is either barred by the Statute of Limitations or by analogy to the Statut of
5. The defendant Bank also says that the plaintiff's claim is a stale demand and that the plaintiff's conduct and laches and acquiescence and delay in connection with his alleged claim has been such as to disentitle him to any relief whatever.
shares with the said Bank the said Bank had notice that some of the said 1,077 shares were not the property of the aforesaid Peter Emil Helga Melbye, otherwise Dunn, Melbye and Company, and in particular that 200 of the said shares were the property of the plaintiff.
The aforesaid Dunn, Melbye and Com-Limitations. pany, otherwise Melbye, failed to place the said Bank in funds to meet their drafts under the afore-mentioned letter of credit at maturity, and the said Bank paid the said drafts at maturity and on or about the 29th March. 1891, a balance of $389,931.18 became due and owing to the said Bank by the said Dunn, Melbye and Company otherwise Melbye in respect the drafts drawn under the aforesaid letter of credit, and the said Bank retained possession of 1,074 of the said 1,077 shares, three of the said 1,077 shares not the property of the plaintiff having subsequently been rodeomed by the said Dunn, Melbye and Company.
On or about 27th March, 1895, an order was made by the High Court of Justice in England for the winding up of the aforesaid Bank of China. Japan and the Straits, Limited, subject to the supervision of the said Court and the defendant bank on about 15th Oc- tober, 1895, became the lawful assignee of the debts, assets, rights and securities of the said Bauk.of China, Japan and Straits, Limited, and as such took over and still retain possession of the aforesaid 1,074 shares of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, including the said 200 shares the property of the plaintiff subject to such right or redemption as is ex- isting in respect of the said shares.
Since the 24th August, 1891, the aforesaid Bank of China, Japan and the Straits, Limited, and the defendant bank have respectively re- ceived various large sums as dividends on the aforesaid 1.074 shares, but no part of the said balance of $319,931,18 has been paid off.
The plaintiff therefore prays:
(1) A declaration that he is entitled to re- doem the 200 shares of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation belonging to the plaintiff bereinbefore mentioned upon pay- ing to the defendant $358.12 per share together with interest thereon after the rate of 7 per centum per annum until payment from the 25th August, 1891, less such sums as have been received in respect of dividends on the said 200 shares since the said 25th August, 1891, and less also the said sum of $4,000 paid by the plaintiff to the said Melbye as margin above-mentioned, or,
as
appear
(2)-In the alternative in case it should to the Court that the above-mentioned Melbye was not merely the pledgee of the said 200 shares but was the agent of the plaintiff to pledge the said 200 shares with the said Bank of China, Japan and the Straits, Limited, then the plaintiff prays & declaration that he is en titled to redeem the aforesaid 200 shares
проп payment to defendant Bank of the proper pro- portion (due in respect of the said 200 shares. of the above-mentioned principal sum of $589,931.18 together with simple interest thereon from the 28th March, 1891, less all dividends received on the said 200 shares.
3. An order directing an account to be taken of what is due to the defendant Bank by the plaintiff in respect of the said 200 shares.
4-An order directing the defendant Bank to deliver up or retransfer the said 200 shares to the plaintiff upon payment by him of the sum found due to the defendant Bank upon the taking of the account last mentioned.
A long amended answer was also put in by the defendants.
Mr. Robinson said that put in a nutshell this suit was a suit for the redemption by Mr. Balilios of certain 20 shares, his property, which shares be mortgaged to one Melbye and which shares the said Melbye remortgaged to the Bank of China, Japan, and Straits, now the Bank of China and Japan. He remortgaged them as portion of a larger lot of 1,077 shares in the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, and the claim of Mr. Belilios was that he had a right to redeem from the submortgagees-the Bank of China and Japan-these shares at the same date that he would have to pay to the mortgagee Mr. Mel. bye; and he took it that if the facts were not in dispute there would be absolutely no dispute at all as to the right of Mr. Belilios in making that demand for redemption. That was Mr. Belilios position. The Bank said, No; they never advanced money on these 200 shares, part of the 1,077, otherwise known to Melbye and Company as Mr. Belilios' agent, and that in respect of those 200 shares Mr. Belilios was their principal debtor. To put the matter in legal language, was Mr. Belilios privy or not priry to the contract between Dunn, Melbye and Company and the Bank whereby the Bank advanced £60,000 to Dunn, Melbye and Com- pany upon the deposit of 1,077 shares, of which shares 200 were the property of Mr. Belilios? The defendants said, "You are not entitled to redeem at all, because you are no longer the owner of these 200 shares, and therefore you are entirely out of court. That was the main issue which the jury would have to determine. Mr. Robinson proceeded to deal at some length with the circumstances under which this transaction arose.
The hearing was adjourned.
March 28th.
The tearing of this case was resumed. Mr. Robinson having concluded his opening speech, the evidence for the plaintiff was called.
213
share. The Shares were never actually delivered to him. His instructions were that they should be taken up by Daune, Melbye, and Co.,
pledge your credit with the Bank?—No. Mr Did you in any way authorise Mr. Coxon to Melbye was then the sole partner in Dunne, Melbye, and Co. Witness" did not see MIA Melbye at all in reference to this transaction, He saw no one in reference to it but Mr. Coxon. Witness carried out his obligation to pay $20 per share, on the 200 shares. He paid the money to Dunne, Melbye and Co. by com pradore order and got a receipt for the money. He kept regular books for his business, and ant entry was made in due course of the payment 1891, he financed 2,019 shares for Mr, Coron® · of $4,000 to Dunne, Melbye, and Co. În June,
and others.
How did you finance those shares P-I got w credit from the Bank of China and drew against their office in London on that credit.
And this transition of August, 1891, with Dunne, Melbye, and Company, operated in the same way and with the same Bank ?-Precisely? Did Dunne, Melbye and Co. charge com mission P—Yes; 4 per cent.
And you charged that commission ? Yes.
dertaking to the Bank to put them in funds f
In June, 1891, you gave your personal un- Yes.
Co. gave an exactly similar personal undertak- And in August, 1891, Dunne Melbye, and ing to the Bank ?—Yes.
You were able to get better terms with the Bank, because the Bauk did not want any margin from you, and they wanted $20 form Dumne, Melbye and Co. P-Yes.
You applied to the Bank and offered to redeem the 200 shares P-Yes.
And offered to pay for them ?—Yes. You offered to pay them $338.12 and simple interest to date of payment ?—Yes.
Neither of these offers was accepted P-No. Did the Bank sne you in respect of the Melbye Syndicate P-Yes.
And they alleged that you were a partner, did they not?—Yes.
And were liable to them in respect of the whole 1,074 shares ?—Yes.
(Case proceeding,)
HONGKONG SANITARY BOARD,
The usual fortnightly meeting of the Hong kong Sanitary Board was held on the 29th inst. Dr. Lowson (Vice-President) presided, and there were also present: Mr. Badeley, Mr. J. McKie, Dr. Hartigan, Mr. E. Osborne, Dr.. Clark, Mr. Fang Wa Chuen, Mr. Chan A Fook, and Mr. J. A. Woodcock (Acting Secretary).
APPOINTMENT OF PRESIDENTS, The following letter from the A oting Colonial Soretary was submitted ;-
until further notice."
THE PRICE or FOOD IN THE COLONY,
Mr. Belilios was the first to enter the witness box. He said that in August, 1891, he bought from Mr. Coxon 200 shares in the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation at $338 12 per share, and those shares came into the "I am directed to acquaint you for the in- possession of the Bank of China, Japan, and formation of the Sanitary Board that His Straits, Limited as part of a lot of 1,077. These Excellency the Governor has cancelled the 200 shares were the subject of the present appointment of the Hon. the Captain Super- suit against the defendant Bank, which was intendent of Police as Vice-President of the the successor of the other Bank. He came Board during the temporary absence from the ket and to counteract the operations of the C.M.G. I am to add that His Excellency has to purchase the shares to support the mar colony of the Hon. J. H. Stewart LockhartĮ“
"bears." He happened to meet Mr. Coxon in been pleased to appoint the Hon. R. D. Ormsby the club one day, and Mr. Coxon said it was to be Acting President and Dr. James - time to buy a few shares, so that they might | Lowson to be Vice-President during the tem- put the price up-to relieve the market of the|porary absence from the colony of Dr. Atkin- pressure which was being brought upon it by son and the Hon. J. H. Stewart Lookhart, or the "bears.” He asked him what was the number which it was proposed to purchase, and replied that he was willing to buy 200. Theu he replied something like 4.000.
they separated. He met Mr. Coron occasion- ally after this, and Mr. Coxon said he was working at it, and in the middle of August Mr. Coxon told him he had bought the shares. told him it was inconvenient for him to pay for the shares, as he was aiready carrying 2,019 shares, and that he was buying those shares on the understanding that some one would finance them. Mr. Coxon said he could arrange that, and that probably Dunne, Melbye and Co. 3. In the alternative the defendant Bank says would finance them. He told Mr. Coxon that he that if the defendant Bank ever had in its pos- would not have bought the abares at all if he session 200 shares belonging to the plaintiff, the had not understood that a large number were plaintiff has long since parted with his property going to be taken up. He afterwards heard in all the said 200 shares to one Peter Emil that Daune, Melbye and Co. had done the fin Helga Melbye, who is mentioned in the Peti-ancing. These 200 shares were financed on the terms that he should pay a margin of $20 per
5. Plaintiff's costs of suit.
6-Such other and further relief as to this Honourable Court may a-en meet.
In their answer the defendant admits the truth of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Petition.
2. The defendant Bank does not admit the truth of any of the allegations contained in paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Petition or any of such paragraphs and the defendant Bank calls upon the plaintiff to prove the truth of such allegations.
tion.
|
Witness
Ho
consideration of the report of the Colonial The next item on the agenda was “Adjourned
Veterinary Surgeon."
The VICE-PRESIDENT said that since the papers had been circulated Mr. Ladds had writ ten suggesting that the consideration of the report be adjourned for a fortnight, as he had. some alterations and corrections to make in it before it was adopted by the Board. He pro- posed that the consideration of the report be postponed for a fortnight.
Dr. CLARK seconded.
Dr. HARTIGAN said he did` not intend to oppose the postponement, but there was oné matter which he thought they might take into consideration at once, and that was with regard to the food supply of the colony. Mr. Ladda said that during the past fira years the price of food had increased, nosely
A
•