480
African coolie emigration. I think the terms were weekly. One day in the middle of October I went in to tiffin, leaving my hat and umbrells in the dining room hat-stand. When I came out I missed them. I went down to the office and found them there. I took the hat, but left the umbrella in the clerk's cus tody where I found it. Next morning, when I went for my umbrella, it was not to be found. I applied to the company; some correspondence followed. Two letters were put in as eri. dence.
Continuing, witness said he had always been willing to point out the clerk in question.
Cross-examined I left the dining room between 2.30 p.m. and 2.45 p.m.
-
By the Court-I went to the hotel on the 2nd October, and left about the 20th November.
His Honour-What were the terms? Mr. Goldring-I do not know.
H. Haynes, in his defence said-It was a weekly account. I received the letter produced on the 7th November, to which I replied after making enquiries among the clerks. clerks staff the office now as in October.
The same
Cross-examined--People sometimes hand coats to the clerk. If Dr. Howley had been appointed to a ship in the middle of a week he would only have been charged for the number of days he was actually a guest during that week. Messrs. Allen and Sunderam (clerks) take it in turn to be in the office, their duties being to allot rooms, collect accounts, give information, and keep the daily accounts; I take charge of valuables in the office safe, for which receipts are given. It is not the duty of the office clerks to take charge of umbrellas; but I know they do so fre- As quently to oblige visitors and customers. soon as the dining room is closed at 2.30 plm. the Indian watchman removes all um. brellas, hats, sticks, etc., from the lobby hat-stand to the office below.
Ram Samey Sunderam, counter clerk, de- posed: I have received hats and umbrellas from the watchman, but have no recollection of this
one.
two
Mr. Goldring said that there were questions for His Honour to consider :-(1) Did the relationship of guest exist between the plaintiff and defendant company-he submitted that it did; and (2) Were not the defendant company in fault for not exercising more care in the matter? He submitted that not
the Hongkong Hotel Company had used any
care at all; and that it was customary for the clerks in the office to look after goods submitted to their care. The de. fendant company, he submitted, would be liable, even supposing the umbrella had been taken from the hat-stand in the hall, but in this case it was in the custody of a clerk in the office.
His Honour, in giving judgment, said that it appeared that in the middle of October the plaintiff was dining at the Hongkong Hotel. That in itself was quite sufficient to make him a guest of the hotel. Judge Kennedy, with regard to a man who had lost an overcoat from a hat-stand, said, "I am of opinion that he is entitled to protection "; and this was the case of a man who merely dined at an inn. In this case, however, when the plaintiff missed his hat and umbrella he went downstairs and found them in the office. It was in evidence that the custom of the hotel was for the dining room to Was the be closed at 2.30 p.m., when it duty of an Indian watchman to take hats. eto., down to the office for safe custody. Apparently this practice was followed on that occasion. Against this he had only the evidence of Sunderam, who said that things might, or might not be, left with him. He thought that under these circumstances the plaintiff was entitled to recover, because, though he took away his hat and not his umbrella, he left the latter in proper custody. If he had taken the umbrella and said to the office boy, "Please look after it," it might have been different.
!
His Honour thought the hotel was responsi- ble, and gave judgment for the plaintiff, but without costs, as the amount claimed was under $10. The plaintiff, however, was entitled to the cost of the writ, $6 in all.
L
· CHEONG LEE & CO. V, DICK DALY, In this case the plaintiff firm_sued the defendant, who keeps a grill room in Des Voeur Rd., for the balance owing to them by the
|
1
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
defendant for household goods sold delivered.
and
Mr. E. A. Bonnar, of Messrs. Dennys and Mr. Bowley, appeared for the plaintiff firm; Barlow for the defendant.
The manager of the plaintiff firm gave evidence that the defendant had purchased goods to the value of $249.65, and had only paid $190,
The defence was that two ice boxes supplied by the plaintiff firm were no good; the freezer did not work; there was no ventilation. When he opened them one day the smell of the meat "nearly knocked him down;" he had to throw it all away.
He told the plaintiffs to take them back, and they said that they would send for them-they never did.
His Honour cut out one small item from the bill, and gave judgment for $57.65-two dollars less than the claim-and costs.
Thursday, 8th December.
IN BANKRUPTCY.
BEFORE SIR H. S. BERKELEY (CHIEF JUSTICE).
CHAN KWAI FAN EX PARTE TANG TSUN I
Mr. Barlow applied for adjudication, the Official Receiver being appointed trustee.
There being no objections His Lordship made out an order.
TUK KUK CHOW EX PARTE CHIN HOK LAM.
Mr. Bailey appeared for the debtor in this case and a similar order was made.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR Mr. T. SERCOMBE SMITH (PISNE JUDGE.)
FUNG TROI V. THE HONGKONG ELECTRIC TRAMWAY CO., LD.
The plaintiff sued the defendant firm for 836 58, wages due. Mr. O, D. Thomson, ap- peared for the plaintiff; Mr. H. W. Looker for the defendant.
Mr. Thomson explained that the plaintiff had been an employee of the defendant firm.
Mr. Looker raised the point as to whether His Honour had jurisdiction-Ord. 45, 1902, Sec. 12, related to employers and servants. There had been a great deal of trouble about that time. The ordinance was passed in order that an employer might have more summary powers. He submitted that all this question of wages had to be determined by a magistrate.
Mr. Thomson said that His Honour had power under Sec. 24.
His Honour to Mr. Thomson-You are sueing for payment of certain wages, and there has been a breach of contract.
Mr. Looker said that the Company was with holding wages as fines for misconduct. The plaintiff had been fined ten days' pay for a five days' absence without leave, three days' pay for allowing another man to take the wheel for him, and other fines.
The plaintiff deposed: I was formerly em- ployed as a driver in the Tram Co., from 1st I was paid at the July to 12th November. rate of $6 92 per week. I was absent for a week The balance of wages due to me are on leave. $36.58
Cross-examined --` When I entered the employ of the ompany I agreed to abide by the rules. There is not a rule forbidding motor men to allow others to operate the car. I have read most of the rules saying that motor men are not allowed to interfere : I have not read I have not read the it before; no time.
On at least book; I am not able to read much. six occasions I had fines deducted from my wages for breaches of rules. I complained. When I joined no rule about suspension was read to me,
|
[December 12, 1904-
Friday, 9th December.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE MR. T. SERCOMBE SMITH (PUISNE JUDGE.)
JUDGMENT AND COSTS,
Judgment and costs was given for the plaintiffs in the following cases :-Gunda Singh v. J. A. Silva, $135; Gunda Singh v. J. M. Silva and another, $80: Soojan Singh v. M. da Silva and another, $120; The I'Tsun v. Yau Chan Man, $58.81; Tak Kee v. Tse Tsuk Ping, 8300; Yan Pun v. J. Rahamin, $21; The Kan Tak Lung v. The Shing Tai, $70.96; A. Cattaneo v. A. Sheffield, 88; Gunda Singh v. Wong Yuk Lam, $50.
CASES ADJOUENED.
Various other cases were dealt with as follows: -Wong Tai Fong v. Tam Man Sam, $100, adjourned sine die."
Chan Kin Cho v. Chan Ting On, $500, Friday. Kruse and Co. v. D. Joseph, $19.90, adjourn- ed for a fortnight.
Ritchie and Co. v. F. L. Clyde, $177.84, to-day. Mow Yne v. Jebsen and Co., $1,000, Friday. Ho Chun Lo Fo, $4.39. Friday.
The Po Yik firm v. An Chun Sang and others, $264 79. Friday.
Ma Wai Nam v. The Yu Hang Cheong v. Tim Sin Man, $167.1, Friday.
MARINE MAGISTRATE'S COURT,
Friday, 9th December.
BEFORE HON. CAPT. L. À. W. BARNES- LAWRENCE (HARBOUR MASTER),
TRESPASSING ON RACE COURSE.
Fu Wo, Master of licensed junk No. 8. 216 H., was charged with unlawfully disobey- ing the lawful orders of the Harbour Master, in that he did cross the course at Yaumati Bay during the progress of a race in connection with the V.R.C. Regatta, Sergeant Boole, of the Water Police, gave evidence as to the the master to CrOBS the persistence of course after being warned not to do Inspector Langley in another police pinnace had also warned him not to do so.
80.
Lam Shan, Master of the junk, said he did not understand what the police inspector said.
By the Court:-Inspector Langley had an interpreter in Chinese with him, but I could not understand what he said. I was going to Sham Sui Po from Hongkong. I saw the flags flying, but did not know the meaning of them.
The Magistrate found the charge proved and +
fined the defendant $2.
JUNK MASTER CAUTIONED.
Cheung Wing Foo, Master of fishing junk No. 6,601, H, was charged at the instance of Captain Jones, R.A., with wilfully disobeying the lawful orders of the Harbour Master, in that he did sail past the shore where the artillery were at practice. In view of the defendant being in custody for 40 hours, the Harbour Master dismissed him`with a caution.
BEFORE MR. BASIL TAYLOR (ASSISTANT.
HARBOUR MASTER).
COLLISION.
An inquiry was held into the collision between the steam launches Ying Fat of which Mak Fan was the Master, and the Choy Sang of which Ho Kau was Master, which occurred in the waters of the Colony on the 28th ultimo. Mak Tsau, master of the Yeng Fat, deposed :-I left Nan Pak Hong for Sham Chan at about 7 a m. on the 28th ultimo. I steered up to Cap Shin Mun. The Choy Sang was coming up astern. When in Cap Shin Man the Choy Sang over- took me. When abreast of ine on my starboard side, she starboarded her helm, and struck me on my starboard quarter, slewing me round to starboard, and I ran ashore in consequence
on the small island to the south of Mawan. My engines were going full speed ahead at the time of the collision. I had not eased them at all at the time. I reversed directly after to try and avoid going ashore. I kept close in shore because the ebb tide was so strong. The
Choy Sang's engines were still going ahead at the time of the collision. They must have been or have run into me. Hó Kau. master of the Choy Sung, said :—The
His Honour, as a recommendation, said the rules wanted revising. It was not stated in them what fines would be levied for acts of misconduct. The rules, in f et, ought to be consolidated and made specific. He gave judg- men', nevertheless, for the defendant firm, with; she could not costs.
i