!
April 1, 1907.]
that time he already had one matshed, where his workmen stopped, and he wanted another built to use partly as an office and partly as a mess, T'erms were arranged between the parties, and as was generally agreed, a condition was made that in case of fro the value of the matshed should be $120, which amount was to be paid to plaintiff if the matshed was burned. A fire did occur, but it occurred in the matshed which had originally been built for the defen. dant by somebody else. The fire spread to the plaintiff's matabed, and that also was destroyed. His Lordship Now you are getting to San Francisco.
Mr. Harding continuing said these fires left the defendant short of accommodation. At this time plaintiff's contract regarding the other matshed had expired, and he was entitled to remove it, and attempted to do so, but the defendant took forcible possession. He called together a large number of Indians who were working for him, assaulted the sent by plaintiff and chased them off the ground.
men
His Lordship-This is very similar, on сег tain points, to the case I heard this morning. All these contracts are verbal. Now, how can you suppose you are going to succeed.
Mr. Harding-My clients agreed with this man, and I have two witnesses to prove it.
His Lordship-Supposing he goes in the box and denies it. How are you going to get over it? And he's bound to do that, seeing be's
here.
Plaintiff called, in the course of bis evidence, spoke about one of the matsheds belonging to another Chinaman.
His Lordship-If that is so, what right have you to sue this man for being in possession ?
Mr. Harding-It is my client's matshed now. His Lordship-A's far as the matsheds go, and the assault, I think this is a police court
case.
Mr. Harding -The Inspector said it was not.
His Lordship-I say it is. It should be sent back to the police Court, and the assault proved first. How many matsheds are there?
Mr. Harding-Three altogether. We built two.
His Lordship- D d your matshed eiichi fire? Mr. Harding-No, the defendant's caught fire and set ours going.
His Lordship-You're got to prove gross negligence to begin with. Why do you sue de. fendant ?
Mr. Harding-We sue him under arrange. ments entered into.
His Lordship-Look at the San Francisco and Jamaica cases. You're got to prove the direct origin, and the direct origin is clearly tot from No. 2 matshed.
Mr. Harding-We don't care how the fire occurred, but when our place is barut down we ask for the price agreed in case of its being barnt down.
His Lordship-You cannot do that, you're got to have stamped policies. In the first place you're up against the Insurance Com panies Act. If you are going to have verbal agreements of this kind they all could bura each others' houses down and claim on such agreements. The whole place would be in rains in about a week.
Mr. Harding then referred to the use and cccupation of the matshed.
His Lordship-You are not going to press that, surely. Show me the policy of insurance with a stamp on and I will be satisfied. I don't believe this man ever took forcible possession st all
Mr. Harding asked his Lordship to allow the claim for $44.80 and for $20 for use and occupation, also to order defendant to relinquish possession.
|
His Lordship-I don't think I'm going to do that at all. The thing's absurd and am not at all sure this is not an illegal claim. An agreement for rent has got to be written down, and on a point of fact I hold you have not proved your agreement. I want to know now whose in possession of this matshed. If the Government are in possession you can't sue this man.
His Lordship then adjourned the hearing until Thursday, when two Indians who are said to reside in the matshed are to be called as witnesses. "If he (the defendant)
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
does not bring them," said his Lordship in conclusion, "I am against him. I expect he'll say they've gone to India."
Thursday, 26th March.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
BEFORE MR. A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGE).
FORGING AND UTTERING,
Sesuke Tenoi, a Japanese, was indicted on the charge of forging a cheque for $200 on the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation document. also with attering and publishing a forged
Prisoner plea led not guilty, and the following jurors vers called: --K. N. Spera, A. C. Sqanir, L. D. Philpot, J.H. Backhouse, C.G.8. Mackie, L. Marston and W. Wotherspoon. Peter Loureiro's name was called, but he was absent. The Attorney-General, Mr. H. H. J Gompertz, instructed by Mr. G. E. Morrell (Crown Solicitor) prosecuted, prisoner being undefended.
2017
When the defendants appeared before his Lordship both admitted the debt.
His Lordship-Very well, judgment and
costs.
Then the first defendant, the husband, er- plained to bis Lordship that he was liable, and afterwards the woman produced reosipta to show that she had redeemed her promise.
Hi Lordship then found that there were two bills, and although the woman said she had paid, she could not produce receipts.
The 0880 Was adjourned until others had been settled. When it was again called on, Mr. Gardiner (of Messrs. Brutton and Hett) who appeared for the plaintiff, asked-Do you want the plaintiff?
His Lordship-No, I will talk to the defendants a little more, I think.
The second defendant, the woman, then bastened to explain thinge.
His Lordship-Pat her in the box: she runs the show.
Second defendant, after being sworn-Now let me explain to your Lordship.
His Lordship-That's what I want you to do, Defendant, proceeding, said that in
the twelfth moon of the year before last she and her husband borrowed $12 from the plaintiff. 8be got the money and gave it to her husband carry OB business, and it Wis ber finger mark that was attached to the promis. sory note.
to
His Lordship –What about the second note ? Defendant- My husband signed this note and gare it to the plaintiff, and I got it back from the plaintiff.
His Lordship-You are speaking about the first. I want to know about the second.
The Attorney General aid the prisoner was only recently employed as "boy' by an officer of the Royal Navy, Lieutenant James, who was now in Japan. Abonta month previons to March 20th he was in the employ of Lientenant Lloyd (homas, in command of the torpedo boat destroyer Jan I?, On the 20th instant, at about kong & Shanghai Bank and uttered a cheque for 1.31 p.m. the defendant appeared at the Hoog
$200 which purported to be signed by Li-utensa! Lloyd Thomas. He handed it to a Mr. East who shoved the cheque to another geatleman in the bink, and as a result of their enquiries the defendant was asked to wait, bis employer then being sent for. The lieutenant arrived at the bank, identified the prisoner as his "boy," and said the cheque had not been signed by him When acensed was taken to the polica station. aud searched, a small leather purse was found on his persoD. 816 payable to the bare, purporting to ba In that purse was a cheqɑn for
sigued by his former employer, Lieutena James. There was als; found another piece off raper on which it appeared the recased bad When charged he said he knew nothing about been practising the signstars of his employer
the obeque, which had been given him by a Chinaman who asked him to change it.
I
¦
After hearing the aridence the jury found the prisoner guilty on both counts.
His Lordship, in passing sentenc», said it was difficult for him to see how they could have found otherwise. Forgery was rather a serious thing, particularly with servants who were to s certain extent in a position of trust. Prisoner wonld be sentenced to five years' hard labour on the first, and three years' hard labour on the second count, sentences to be concurrent.
Thursday, March 28th.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE SIR FRANCIS Piggott {(xIKY
JUSTICE).
DISPUTED PO«SESSION OF TIN
The case was concluded in which the Kee Gnan firm. Buu Tin-kes and Thong Seng sued the Yau On Marine Insurance and Godown Co and the King Kee firm. The plaintiffs claimed a declaration that they were entitled to a first charge on 590 slabs of tin which had been store in the Hongkong and Kowloon Wharf and Godowa Co's, premises to the order of Mr. G. H. Wakeman, to the extent of 849,288.15. The Hon. Mr. H. E. Pollock, K. (instructed by Mr. George Hastings), appeared for the plaintiffs, while Mr. M. W. Slade, (instructed by Mr. H. Hursthouse, of Messrs. Dennys and Bowley's Offie-) for the King Kee, and Mr A. C. Holborow, (of Mesere Decor, Looker and Demoon) represented the defendants.
After hearing lengthy evidence his Lordship reserved his decision.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION
Bronz Ma. A. G. Wise (Puisse Judgx).
A PROMISSORY NOTE DISPUTE.
Bhola Singh sued 80 Sbau sad bis wife to recover $72 due on a promissory note.
|
|
|
|
D. fendant - In the fourth moon of last year my husband gave me $10) and then went away to attend to his business In the fifth moon Bhola Singh asked me to pay the money and I made a fiuger mark to the promissory note.
His Lordship- Very well, judgment and costs. and if she takes my adrios she'll teir up the first note. As for the first defendant he shouldn't try to tell his wife what to say.
This remark, when interpreted, had the effect again making the defendants desirous to explain, but bis Lordship did not wish to hear, and wid to the bailiff -All right, put them out.
CHINESE BUSINESS METHODS.
Tha Kau Shean Co. sued the Tai Hang Cheong firm to recoved. $12. due for printing. The master of the defendant firm denied liability, remarking that the goods had been ordered by one of the heads.
His Iriship-Bat the order has the chop of your firm oo.
Defendant - Every one in the shop has access to the correspondencs chop, from the master down to the cook.
His Lordship-That's what I say. More fool you
Defendsat-It is not only myself, but such in the case in every shop.
His Lordship – If you allow this sort of thing to go on you must kaffer. What I say in that an accountant cao bind his master's credit nuloss you can prove to me he had no sathority so to do. Defendant-In that case, my Lord, we'll have to close our business.
His Lordship – There is not only the question about the shop, but the question about the man who put the chop on. That man was the accountant, and in the usual way he bas authority to bind his master's oradit.
Defendant These goods were not supplied for the use of my shop; the socountant got them for his own ass and benefit.
His Lordship—And he's run away, I suppons, Well, you'd better pay. Judgment and costs for pisiutiff.
During the last few days repeated negotia- tions have taken place between the Waiwupu so the British Minister about the indemnity for Englishmen who suffered through the Shanghai riots of December 1905. The Chimano Government has acknowledged in principle the obligation to pay an indemnity and has scoord- ingly ordered the Shanghai isotal to arrangu the det vilu about the amount with the English authorities in Shanghai. Thereupon Taotsi | Jai Cheng has asked to be allowed to resign
his office, as he dose not feel himself equal the difficultise onused by the relations with foreign countries.