218-
while 45 rats were discovered out of 719 killed; during the following week.
The M.O.H. asked the Board to again advertise asking people to report whenever they found their houses rat-ridden. They do so now, he said, but a reminder would be advisable as the plague season is beginning.
SUPREME COURT.
Monday, March 19th,
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF JUSTICE).
Li I Mui, who described himself as a bank elerk, was indicted on two charges of forgery. The first count alleged that he forged a passage ticket with the intention of obtaining a passage to Bangkok per 8.8. Loosok on the 22nd February, and the second alleged that he uttered he said ticket with the intention of defrauding, the master of the said steamer. The Attorney General (Sir Henry Berkeley), instructed by Mr. C. E. Morrel (of Messrs Dennys and Bowley), prosecuted. Prisoner, who was undefended, pleaded not guilty.
་
The following jury was empanelled — Messrs. C.-M. G. Burnie (foreman), W. E. Craig, John Rachan, B. J. Spittles A. O. Lang, H. Haines G. L. Hales.
The Attorney-General in opening said the passage tickets would be put in and the jury would have little hesitation in coming to the conclusion that they were very clever forgeries, in this case the name of the steamer Loosook having been filled in. Evidence would be given to the effect that when prisoner was arrested and his place searched a large number of those tickets was found, clearly indicating that he was engaged in extensive frauds on the steamboat company. It was not a difficult forgery by reason of the many blanks. The prisoner was detected in the following manner. A native went to a hong where the tickets were authorised to be sold in order to purchase passage tickets for friends of bis who wished to proceed to Bangkok. There he was informed that there were none left, but prisoner who happened to be present and overhear the conversation accosted the applicant and told him he could procure tickets for him at the Yuen Fat houg. The applicant agreed to take the tickets and told him to bring them to his shop that evening. Prisoner did so, and said he would call again for the money, the price being $11 for each of the sighteen tickets. The native, who knew the ordinary price was $13 each, sent his foki next day to the steamer to ascertain if the tickets were genuine. He did not return and when the witness went to
the steamer he found that his foki had been detained and he was himself arrested. Subse-
quently the police were informed and when they arrested prisoner they found a book containing 81 forged tickets, all chopped and ready for use. Besides the native in question, another man would speak to purchasing tickets from prisoner at $12 each.
Evidence having been adduced at length, the jury returned a verdict of guilty, and prisoner was sentenced to five years' imprisonment.
NO EVIDENCE,
The Attorney General intimated that in the eases of Choy Chung Li, committed on a charge of fraudulent bankruptcy, and Lo Fui Chan, Lo Chu San and Lo Tak Hing, charged with conspiracy in connection with the above case nó 'indictments had been filed.
Wednesday, March 21st.
IN APPELLAT: JurispicTION.
BEFORE THE FULL COURT (SIR FRANCIS FIGGOTT, CHIEF JUSTICE, AND Mr. A. G.
WISE, PUISNe Judge).
Á PARTNERSHIP DIFFICULTY.
Chan Ip Shiv. the Wing Kee firm and in the matter of an issue between the said Chan Ip Shi and Lau Sui Chiu. Mr. M. W. Slade, instructed by Mr B. A. Harding, appeared for the appellants, and the Hon. Mr. H. E. Pollock, K.C., instructed by Mr. C. F. Dixon, represented the respondents.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
Mr. Slade said that appeal was from a decision of the Chief Justice given in the early part of this year. They should not have ventured to appeal because to a large extent it was a question of fact had it not been for the very material question of how far the burden of proof should affect the decision of that case. In order to make the points clear he thought it would be well to relate the facts as nearly as possible in chronological order. The plaintiff, woman, juding by the name, had obtained an injunction by the Court against the Wing Kee firm in July of last year. The Wing Kee firm carried on the business of the Ko Shing Theatre, the managing partner of which was Pang Hok-chu. In 19 3 the Fung Kat bank's managing partner was Ynen Kok his extravagance and carelessness in adminis cho. At the end of 1904 this man by reason of tration br. ught the bank to a state of insolvency and was removed from his position by the other partners, and the defendant Lan Suai-chai was appointed in his place. He was really appointed to wind up the affairs of the bank. The previous manager went bankrupt in the summer of 1905 and died in December, 1905. It appeared from the evidence that he had made loans to the also that he was in receipt of $30 a month from Wing Kee firm to a considerable amount, and
that firm not to press them for repayment of their loans. Apparently that payment was also the firm. made to induce him to bring more capital into While he was manager of the bank in December, 1903, he subscribed out of the funds of the bank $1,50 to the Wing Kes firm as and for a share. The position of this man whom he had described as a manager of the bank was a matter of some interest, perhaps more in relation to his creditors than in relation to the immediate facts of that case. He strenuously denied that he was a partner in the Wing Kee firm, perhaps not unnaturally, as the firm was not in a satisfactory condition, but he had been compelled to admit under examination that he was one of the promoters of the firm, that he had signed a number of promissory notes that he received a tenth part of the profits, and
for money borrowed by the firm, in his own name and not as manager, which would limit his liability. This man stated that the defendant Lau Sui-chi had several interviews with him and be further stated that this money, $1,500, which was brought by Yuen Kok Cho from the bank there paid over to the manager, an entry being was taken by him to the Ko Shing Theatre and then made in the partnership book. That and the cash book of the firm were produced, in which it appeared that the sum of $1,500 was two hong names. paid, and it appeared that it was entered under The story of the witness was contradicted in every material point by the two witnesses called for the defence, by the defendant himself and by the assistant
[March 24, 1906 Ca
Their Lordships could not see their way to exclude the statement made by a partner in suollerią proceedings. The Chief Justice said they had cưới considered it merely in the abstract,
Mr. Slade then put in the statement and mid gar that with that additional evidence, he i was entitled to succeed,
Mr. Justice Wise said the point to basket remembered was that the Chief Justice WAS WE sitting in the case as judge and jury, and that wi being so the point to be considered was whether gre the decision was against the balance - of evidence or not. He was of opinion that tha appeal should be dismissed with costs.
ܪ܂
The Chief Justice did not consider the books were fabricated. He did not think the state.... ment put in carried the matter any further and
with costs. he agreed that the appeal should be dismissed.
The Court adjourned sine die.
Thursday, March 22nd.
•
IN BANKRUPTCY,
BEFORE SIR Francis Piggott (Chinf. JUSTICE).
A COMPRADore's bankrUPTCY. Lai Wai Chuen ex parte Lad Yang Shan...... Mr. H. J. Gedge (of Messrs. Johnson, Stokes and Master) appeared for the petitioning cre ditor. He said that the debtor was formerly the compradore of the Hongkong Bank, but he had since left its service.
Debtor was adjudicated bankrupt.
AN INFANT'S BANKRUPTCY. Chan Tai ez parte Chan Hing.
Mr. H. J. Bailey (of Messrs. Johnson, Stokes and Master) said the application was that bankruptcy order made in 1903 be annulled on the ground that he was an infant. The order was made against a firm, of which it was thought this infant was one of the partners.
Mr. F. X. d'Almada e Castro, appeared for the petitioning creditor, and admitted the facts. At the time the petition was filed they were not aware of the fact that that infant was an infant, as all the debtors were out of the Colony. The firm belonged to the debtor's father and when he died his sons carried on the business for the benefit of the family. He had no objection to the order being annulled so far as the infant was concerned,
Mr. Wakeman—I have no objection. The Chief Justice-What is his age? Mr. Bailey-Sixteen.
The Chief Justice-What is Chinese full age?
Mr. Bailey-Twenty-one, I think. The Interpreter-No, sixteen.
The Chief Justice-Of course this is regu lated by Chinese law.
Mr. Bailey-He was thirteen when the order was made.
The Chief Justice--There was nothing personal in the matter? It was merely an a
partner?
Mr. d'Almada—Yes. The Chief Justice-Very well, the application is granted.
WHAT IS A PLEDGE ? Re Hing Sing Cheong ex parte Hamburg. Amerika Linia,
Mr. H. W. Wakeman said this was a notios $7,247, the net proceeds of certain goods stored of motion for declaration that the sum of
in the name of the above debtors, form part of the estate of the debtors.
accountant, who was the sole member of the staff of the bank still resident in Hoog. kong. It was also contradicted by the books of the bank which his Lordship had held to be genuine books and properly kept. It appeared on the face of those books that the money was paid over to Yusu Hop Cho in the bank on that pressed this man to do something for the $30 a date. It appeared that the Wing Kee firm had month they paid to him, and he put in that $1,500 which he had obtained at very little expense to himself out of the bank. Proceeding, he con- tended that the burden of proof was undeniably on those persons who wished to impose that very serious liablity upon the defendant, and he poi ted to the remarkable fact that though he was said to be the only partner resident in Hongkong, yet the present manager of Ko Shing was not aware of it. Again this woMAD Chan Ip Shi had not attempted to obtain the fruits of her judgment from any other
Mr. Wakeman stated that certain goods but defendant, who was being made liable for stored in the Hop Yick Godown had been the debts of the company. All the facts raised pledged as security for the sum of $18,000, a certain amount of suspicion, and if to that advanced. A portion of the goods had been were added the very material discrepancies in the sold and this the Insurance Co. objected to, evidence which he had pointed out, he thoughting, he said that on 21st January a petition
because it diminished their fecurity. Prossed their Lordships would be very unwilling to saddle the defendant with the heavy responsi- bility which a decision adverse to him would involve.
Mr. Pollook afterwards addressed the Court, replying to the arguments of Mr. Slade. He contended that the evidence which appellant wished put in could not be admitted.
Mr. H. W. Looker (of Messrs. Descon... Looker, and Deacon) said he opposed the application on behalf of the Yuen On „Eire Insurance Co., Ltd.
was filed against debtors and a receiving order was made. . At the time of the commencement of the bankruptcy they had a large quantity of goods stored in perta godowns in Hongkong, a considerable of which was pledged to other debtors absconded and they had heard of. As far as the
.