402
on
on
was
under the circumstances that the opium was in his possession. The ground floor was visible through the grating, and what the persons on the first floor were doing when the police officer entered the shop he could not say. When the raiding party went upstairs two men were in the cubicle. Plaintiff was in the cubicle and was lying down the bed. Sit-
the side of ting
the bed another man who, he beliefed, wes Wong Kam Chee. It was not said they were smoking. but there was every facility for it. The lamp was lit and there was a good deal of opium, both contraband and opium farm on the tray. A lemon full of opium was lying on the tray and also a hora box partially filled with prepared opium. Two vessels were containing opium, also a lump of raw opium which he understood was mixed with propared opium and used in that way. A search was make of the sitting room, but nothing was found there. A fire-tael tin of the opium farmer's opium was found in a locked box. and for it a certificate Was produced The constable and the excise officers were of opium that the certificate was produced by the plaintiff He believed that Wong Kam Chee opened the box, ca he was manager of the shop. The question was not who had the keys but who was in possession, or apparent possession, of the opium. The constable asked who was the
found
owner or master of the shop, but neither of the two men answered. Under those circumstances, the plaintiff having produced the certificate and being found lying on the bed, it was assumed that the opium was in his posses- sion, custody, or control, within the definition of the Ordinance. The constable consid- ered that he had good grounds for making the arrest. After the arrest there was some question raised to the effect that plaintiff was the wrong man, tut as the constable knew he would be bailed ont immediately he took him to the station and laid the charg. Plaintiff
was bailed out within ten minutes or a quarter of au hour Ho submitted that the plaintiff was in apparent possession of the opium and that ander the circumstances there were good grounds for supposing it was in his possession and that defendants did not arrest him maliciously.
Evidence was then led for the defence.
His Lordship in delivering judgment said it
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
Thursday, 26th November.
IN BANKRUPTCY,
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR WILLIAM M. GOODMAN (Chief JusTICE).
DISSENSION AMONG PARTNERS.
The adjourned case was called of the applica- tion for a receiving order by the firm of Ku Fat and Kn Fat Chun, 77, Bonham Strand and 289, Queen's Road Central. This applica tion had already been up twice before the Conrt. On the last occasion, the 12th inst., his Lordship nade a further adjournment in order notice of the petition might be served upon the five non-consenting partners out of the tota of ten partners composing the firm.
Mr. F. Paget Hett, solicitor, of Mr. G. K. Hall Brutton's office, appeared in support of the petition. He stated that there was now before his Lordship an affidavit to the effect that notice bad been served on all the partners since the last hearing.
His Lordship remarked that he saw from the affidavit that notice had been served upon Lok Yip Man, the managing partner, who on the previous occasion was one of the non-consent- ing partners to the application. Then there were three other men, who all appeared to be in Canton; they had been written to and informed of the petition and requested to return to Hongkong to attend the Court. He did not know that he could take that as equivalent to service of the petition on these men. At the same time, be thought that, subject to any application they had to make in the matter, they were cognisant of the petition; they did not appear to oppose it at any rate. On the previous occasions he declined to make any order because half the partners opposed the application-that was to say, did not consent to it; they did not say one thing or another. Then there หยด an affidavit that the managing partner did
not consent. Now he had been s rved with the petition and ha was not present. Was Mr. Hett in a position to show that the managing partner had received this petition ?
8 emed to him that a very important point in the case was the position of the plaintiff when the excise officers and the constable entered the house. The plaintiff's story was that he went to sleep in a sort of semi drunken state in the sitting room. Defendants' evidence was to the effect that the opium was found in the cubicle. He believed the pla ntiff's story that he was asleep when the officers entered--whether from the effects of opium or of samshu. If he was asleep in the sitting-room there was no reason- able cause to arrest him. But the defendants' witnesses stated that they found him in the cubicle one said he was sitting on the cuch, the others that he was lying down-with the lamp and all the opium-smoking paraphernalia beside him and also some of the opium larmer's opium. If he was inside the cubicle where the illicit çpium was found clearly they had a right to arrest him. On the point as to whether or not it was Wong Kam Cheo who produced the opium certificate the witnesses we at variance. Wong stated that he was ou the verandah when the officers entered. Defendants witness said ho was in the same room as the plaintiff was in. Why he should go and make a scapegoat of himself was rather curious: perhaps it was that they wished to put up a new man quo would get off with 8 much less penalty than the plaintiff who had been twice convicted for being in possession of illicit "piam. His Lordship added that be believed the defendants' witnesses altogether. Whether or not the plaintiff had been smoking opium on the night in question, he was certain he had heen smoking opium that morning. Judgment for defendants with costs. The Court adjourned.
*
Mr. Helt replied that he was in a position to do 80.
A notice signed by the managing partner bad appeared in the local Press saying that the sale of the firm's goods would t ke place, and it was now proceeding.
His Lordship remarked that as they had had opportunity of being there that day he would
in the circumstances make a receiving order. First, however, he would like to examine one of the partners.
4
an outside One partner, who said he was part or stated that h did not know what money the firm had in hand, but he believed the deficit was about $4,00a.
His Lordship said it appeared that this applica. tion was made in the names of all the different partners and they did not seem to know any
hing about it On the previous occasion the man who went into the box said he did not even know how many partners there were in the firm.
Lau Yip. another partner, was put in the witness-'ox. He dep sed that the firm's liabilities amounted to 87,522.44 and the a sels to $6,002.79. They had taken stock of goods in band and debts due, and these made up the $6,000 odd. The figures were got from the boo s.
His Lordship-I understand you to say. Mr. Hett. that the firm are now selling off the goods?
Mr Hett-Yes.
(November 30, 1903.
materials now left on these promises. Liabilities amounted to about $3,20a for materials sold and delivered to tho debtors and work done for them.
enable
to
Mr. d'Almada stated that when this petition was last before the Court an adjournment was made by his Lordship, after hearing evidence to the effect that $1,90 was due trom the directors of the Tung Wa Hospital, to
him
ascertain the exact amount dus. He had written to Mr. Brotherton Harker, the architect for the Hospital, asking what amount was due to the firm, and the reply was that there was absolutely nothing due to these contractors from the directors of the Tung Wa Hospital. then a creditor had obtained judgment against He had obtained a gar- the firm for $1.474.
Since
rishe order. and the directors of the Hospital had admitted that there was 8,014 due to the contractors
His Lordship said this creditor had got judg ment for some $1,0-0 odd against the firm, and their idea in applying for a receiving order was to baulk the judgmen creditor and prevent him from getting his money, in recovering which he had gone to all this trouble and been more diligent than the other oreditors.
Mr. d'Almada remarked that they wanted to put all the creditors on the same footing,
His Lordship said his experience of these Chinese debtors was that they did not care about paying any of their creditors but they liked to baulk the man who has got judgment against them and wanted to be paid. He must adjourn this matter. The case must be done properly. There must be an affidavit filed to show that the directors admitted this money was due to the contractors. The letter of Mr. Harker was the only positive evidence they had in the matter. He had not the slightest doubt that if the credi tor had not got judgment against the petitioners they would never have come to the Court at They owed this man over $1,000 and all judgment was given against them, when suddenly they were seized by a burning desire that all
creditors should be equally paid and that the judgment creditor should not derive any benefit from the legal proceedings he had taken. So they came forward with insufficient affidavits and asked him to make a receiving order, that this man might not get the proceeds of that judgment. He was entitled to the benefit of that judgment which he got unless and until the Court, acting upon proper
His Lordship-Then I will make a receiving order and appoint Mr. Bruce Shepherd to be official receiver
BUILDING CONTRACTORS IN DIFFICULT ES,
the
materials laid before it. made a receiving order. He did not think he had any right to make an order unless these materials were before him.
Mr. d'Almada-I will file an affidavit.
His Lordship entered a note pointing out that no sufficient affidavits w re before him to show that the Fung Wa Hospital were now indebted to the firm who were applying for the receiving order an I that as Mr. d'Almada told him that Mr. Barker, the architect of the Tuug Wa Hospital, had written to deny liability, he could not ssume they owed the money and did not feel justified in making a receiving order at present.
The Court adjourned.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGE).
my p
FELLOW VICTIM-,"} R. A. Collins sued his late landford, Li Chak Saug, for $23 odd, overcharges for water-meter taxes. Mr. C. Ewens of Messrs. Ewens and Harston, solicitors, appeared for the defendant.
་
Plaintiff stated that bis claim represented money overcharged on him by the Government on water bills in respect of his house No. 4. High Street, He applied to the Director of Public Wooks for a service of water to be led o i to th house, and finding that the Government The Kwong Hang firm of building con-required that it was the landlord who had to tractors (composed of Ng Yui, Ng Lok, Ng undertake this work he asked the landlord to lay Sze Fat and Yu Liu Kok) applied for a receiv- on the service, saying he was quita willing to ing order
This was done and subsequently ex parte the debtors. Mr. F. X. pay the cost d'Almada e Castro, solicitor, appeared in sup- the water bills were sent to him through the port of the petition.
laudlord. For the first month the bill was for $14 and for the next quarter $15. He then discovered that the water service which was
From an affidavit filed by one of the partners it appeared that the assets of the debtors con. Messrs.sisted of about $2,200, being $1,900 balance due from the Tung Wa Hospital in respect of work done in the erection of a new wing for the Hospital, and $300 balance, being the value of
On the 17th inst. a fire happened at No. 41 Rua de N. S. do Amparo, Macao, Meyerink & Co. have had the insured put under arrest for arson. The estimated loss by that fire is $40,000, including the risk to No. 41
registered by his meters led on to four or five other houses. When these had been cut off from his meter his average bill was $5 per quarter. He had to pay the overcharge
7