May 9, 1903.]
as well' hold gold as hold|||jewelry. The Chinese liked home gold for keeping purposes. Then it was argued by the other side that the plaintiff could produce de documentory evidence to show how he obtained these notes. He could | not show how this $50,000 sotually came, but he could produce and bad produced books showing | how a great del more than the $50,000 came, of which the $50,000 was a part. That plaintiff did not retard balance sheets of his business did not prove that he was a dishonest trader; plaintiff explained in his evidence that he paid for everything in cash It was only on the point of the weight of the box that the defence had produced any positive evidence; the rest was inferential.
40
....!
|
|
|
CHINA OVERLAND TRADË REPORT.
|
331
questions. shipped contained $50,000 zʊki ?—No.
Question 1-Are you sitisfid that the box
His LordsbipAre you unanimous í í that P- The Foreman-Unanimous.
"
shipped did not contain $50,000 goki P——Yes. Question 2-Aro you satisfied that the bor Five to one.
guilty of a false and fraudulent misrepresenta« On the issue of fraud-Was the plaintif
shipped were of the value of $50,0.0 P—Yen-Ive was untrue hetion when he declared the contents of the bar
In
the jury were satisfied that there was $50,000 in the box shipped their verdict should be for the plaintiff. It wis no defence for the defendants | jury found that the box shipped did not contain to say that somebody else stɔ'e the box. If the that sum their verdict must be for the defen dants, for two reasons-bec ass they were only liable for what the plaintiff had proved the box to contain and because if the representation of the plaintiff to the defendants that there was 850,000 in the box intended to deceive them and that was on his part fraud, which vitiated the whole contract, considering the question whether or not the money was put on board, they had to ask them- selves two other questions-Was the plaintiff and if so, was he likely to have in his possersion | in a position to send $50,000 gold to Manila, this amonut in American gold morey ? believed that Le was in a position to send this If they money down, then had be any reason for sending it? documentary evidence to ɛh-w that he had this hillips had said that plaintiff had no money in his possession on 12th September last. having been put in. I'laintiff swore positively His Lordship did not remember any that he had this money. Mr. Slade s ggested that he kept it in that way for four years bacanse he was a miser. breath they were told he was a merchaut of Yet in the Fame bold and speculative character. explanation that he got the money from U.S. As to his ships of war, evidence had been called to show that those ships made their payments iu local currency; other evidence had been
Mr.
to one.
been abstracted from the steamship Zafiro Pika Has it been proved that the box shipped has Yes. Unanimous.
the defendant-give verdiot for the defendant.- His Lordship-Upon that you ought to find for The Foreman—We find for the defendant. The Registrar— Are you unanimous The Foremaa-We are.
with costs, my Lord.
Mr. Morgan Philips-I apply for judgment *
ance and for the manner in which they hid afterwards thanked the jury for their attend- His Lordship gave judgment so3 rdingly, and
listened to the esse
ANGSI
THE FAMINE IN KWANGSI
PROVINCE.
REPORT BY MR CLEMENTI.
Mr. C. Clementi has written the following
it.
actually in point of that whtaine that box called his showed that U.S. transports paid courtesy we are enabled to publish ough whose
His Lordship in summing up said there was a specific allegation by the plain iff that the box contained $50,00 gold. Defendants admitted having received the box but denied that it contained that sum or any part thereof in U.S. currency. Referring to the bill of la ting, it was in ordinary form. In the margin of the bill of lading was written, "T.8.T.; one case U..banknotes said to valus $50,000 gold money." That was Lot in his opinion a sufficiently specific declaration, by the plaintiff that he had shipped banknotes of the value of 850, 0) kold, but merely that he bad shipped banknotes, said to value that amount. In the body of the bill of lading above the signature of the person who signed it od behalf of the defendants were the words, Weight, contents and value unknown." In bis opinion the effect of these words was to limit the responsibility of the defendants to answer
fact contained the time it was rec ived on board their ship, and consequently plaintiff had to satisfy the jury that the box wher shipped did contain $50,000 gold. He thought that the law laid down in the case of Lebaud . General S N. Co., 8 LAB.C.P, p. 96, was applicable to this case. The case of the Amelien More, 2 Asp. M.L, Cases (N.B.), Vol. II had also been quoted in which a contrary view appeared to bare been taken by Mr. Justicehillimore but there was this essential difference between that case and the Zafiro case that the plaintiffs in that case were not the persons who shipped originally but they were assignees for the value. Without saying that that was the ground on which that case went he might say that if the Amelien cace had to be put against the Lebaud case he preferred to follow he latter. In that case lord Justice Brett said that when a closed case is offered to the master with a representation as to the nature of its contents on the bill of lading he might accept it without alteration of the bill of lading. But if he alters the bill of lading by a state mout that the contents are unknown it is clear as a matter of business and it seems from the American cases and Jessel v Bath to be law that he thereby declines to accept the declara tion of the shipper. In other words this means that if you go to the master of a ship with a closed caso and tell him it contains goods of a certain value and make a memorandum to that effect in the margin of the bill of lading he is not bound by that statement if he adds to or places on the bill of la ing a statement that the contents and value are unknowa to him. Ɛupp(89 the box insted of being lost had been opened in Mau la And had been found to contain only $500 it would be contrary to reason and commonsense to call upon the shipowner in the face of the Statement on the bil of lading that the contents and value were unknown to im to lay $49,500, unless the shipper could prove that that sum was in the box at the time it was shipped and it seemed to him the same principle would apply where the box had been lost. Mr. Blade had contended that by the acceptance of a special rate of freight on this box defendants had bound themselves to accept the plaintiff's statement as to the special value of the article shipped. That argument was not sound. The special freight was charged because the shipper declared the box to be of a certain value and because it was rule of the defendants in common with all shipping com- panies to protect themselves as far as they could by making special rates where freight vis shipped above a certain value. In doing so he shipowner did not bind himself to accept pliontin z déclaration of the value of the box. If
-
|
in gold: but uone to show that the of war made payments except in local currency. When they came to the story of how he packed the money, the story the plaintiff told the Court Mr. Hastings. The plaintiff bad on his own was, as the defendants said, ot the story he told admission deliberately made fa'ge statements, and he must not be surprised if his evidence now was not believed without strong corrobora. tion. That Mr. Fang Wa Chun told him that Mr. Hastings was a shipping clerk had been denied and was not likely. Then they had to remember that when the box was taken on board the second officer was struck by its lig. tuers in weight which he estimated at 14lbs, and that by way of explanation thereof the plaintiff said at that time that the box con- tained nothing but banknotes. The plaintiff however now says that that box contained 50) American silver dollars and it had boon shown by expect testimony that a box containing silver of that value plus banknotes to the value of $19,500 weighed 53lbs. His Lordship further said he did not know whether there was anything in it or not, but they had to consider. too, this fact that when the bill of lading arrived at Manila a Filipino, and a Chinese who could not talk English, were sent for the box which was said to contain £.0,000. Continuing. his Lordship remarked the jury were asked to believe that 8 man gold in Hongkong had sent it down to Manila who had $50,000 on the off chance of perhaps one day getting might call for a deposit of $50,0 0. In this a contract which might require security which connection His Lordship reminded the jury Sharps taken on ormmission in Manila that the that it appeared from the evidence of Colonel US Government had not at any time during 1902 advertised for tenders for any contract or contracts which would require security for their fulfilment amounting to $50,0 0 or anything approaching that snm. In conclusion His Lordship read the questions to be answered by the jury as follows:--
Are you satisfied that it bas been proved that the-box shipped contained $50,000 gold?
Are you satisfied that the box shipped did not contain 850,000 gold ?
Was the plaintiff guilty of false and frandu- lent misrepresentation in declaring the contents of the box to be of the value of $50,00 gold ? been abstracted from the steamship Zafiro?
Has it been proved that the box shipped has
The jury retired to consider their verdict and returned to the Court after an absence of less than three minutes.
Ts'am (hau-fu. Kwong Sai,
26th April, 1903. Your Excellency,--I left Hongkong by the 88. Kwong Chau on the 21st inst., reaching Canton at 6 a.m. the following morning. I left Canton at 8 a.m. the same day by the sa Sainam, reaching Wuchow at 4 pm. on the call upon the Consul-General, but I hope to do 2rd inst. I had no time while in Canton to ́
Excellency will be good enough to inform him so en my way back. Perhaps meanwhile Your of the mission upon which you have sent me. At Wuchow I called upon Mr. Fox, the British Consul, and on his advice proceeded without delay to Ts'um Chau, the_prefectural tòwn, which I understand the Chinese authorities propose to make the capital of this province.
24th, and arrived at Ts'am Chan at 8-30 a.m. 1 left Wuchow by launch at 6 s.m. on the next morning, accompanied by Mr. R. A. Jaffe ray (of the Christian and Missionary Alliané› - of New York). We were met by Mr. J. E. Fee, of the same mission, who resides in Tsam Chau. The first sight I saw on entering the town was a man lying in the street actually dying but not quite dead, whom two men were" picking up with a rope to carry off to bury, The same morning, walking round the city wall, I saw another man's dead bɔdy, and in throwing the uncoffined body into a small pit little later I also saw the burial, which consisted dug just outside the city wall and filling up the my arrival bave appalled me, and I pit with earth. The sights I have seen since astonished that the Chinese should now call no not
market day, and therefore there was no Ts'am Chau "a dead place." Yesterday was z distribution, for two reasons() that the number of people coming into the town on such a day would be more than the present relief fund can cops with, and (3) that a number of fairly well-to-do impostors might be expected to apply for rice on the market days. Accordingly I employed my afternoon in walking through the neighbouring country, The destitution actually existing there now w terrible. The people have first sold their goods and chattels, then their farming implements, next the water buffaloes with which they ploughed their fields, then the tiles off the roofs of their houses, then their daughters, sins, and floslly even their wives. The farmsteads " ard bare walls, empty of anything save a little dirty”. straw on which to lie.
This state of absolute destitution can only go on increasing until
rice
The Registrar (Mz. A. Setb)-Have you which is due at the end of July, snif the one agreed upon your verdict?
The Foreman---Yes.
ray of hope is that the barvest
It is frue that in many cases the fá had no rice to plaut and that a number
The Registrar-Are you unanimous ? The Foreman-With regard to some of the are lying fellow, but on the whole I should be
{