THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
The Official Receiver had at first objected to | THE ALLEGED CONSPIRACY CASE. the soheme but he now believed its acceptance
would be advantageons to the creditors.
The Chief Justios, after persuing the scheme, said it did not seem a very satisfactory one but there did not appear to be any tangible reason why he should disapprove of it.
Mr. Bowley-Will your Lordship fix the security of the trustees. I understand the Off. cial Receiver fires the amount at $20,000 each.
The Chief Justice - Very well.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE MR. A. G. WISE (Poianɛ JUDGE).
INSUFFICIENT PARTICULARE,
Action was brought by Chan Yuen-lun, trading under the name of Kwong Sing Lung, to recover of Cho Kan, trading as the Kwong Tak Lung, the sum of $289.54. Mr. E. J. Grist (of Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Otto Kong Sing for the
defendant.
Mr. Grist-Plaintiff's claim is for $289.5+, balance due for goods sold and delivered as per particulars. Your Lordship will see that three items for stone total $786.59, and there
is a credit given for $497,05, leaving a balance
due of the amount claimed. I have received from my friend a letter dated December 7th in which he said he had paid $117 into Court in satisfaction of the plaintiff's claim. That is not a sufficient specification of the items he admits and I am not able to accept that money, because I cannot go into the matter and see Your Lordship how it is the $117 arises. will see by the Code that in paying in money the defendant is obliged to say how be arrives at the figure which he pays into Court. Otherwise the plaintiff cannot really ascertain his position; he does not know whether he has got to fight the action, or whether it is better to accept that amount in settlement. Therefore I submit in this case that either I go on with the action and do not treat this as a payment in, or that the matter should stand over for my friend to specify how he makes up the money. This is practically a statement of account between the parties.
His Lordship-You are not prepared to take the $117 in full satisfaction?
Mr. Grist-No, my Lord. I don't know how
it is arrived st.
Mr. Kong Sing-I can point that out Your Lordship will see on the writ particulars of the three items. As a matter of fact this work was done under a contrast and payments were made to the plaintiff, or at his request. It is impossible for me to render the particulars my friend wants, more especially as he claims a balance. My books show conclusively what items are missing from the plaintiff's books, and if my friend does not care to take the money he can go on with the case.
Mr. Grist-Quite so, my Lord. And if I obtain judgment I am entitled to costs. My friend is obliged to show how he arrives at his particulars.
Mr. Kong Sing-The letter I wrote to my friend was sent before the writ was issued. If he wanted particulars my books were open for inspection.
His Lordship-I think you had better go on unless the plaintiff is prepared to accept.
Mr. Grist-If we go on I would ask to be allowed my costs, even if I don't succeed, becausa my friend was obviously at fault under the Code in not furnishing particulars, and how they were arrived at.
Mr. Kong Sing-If I succeed I will ask for costs from November 18th. I submit my friend is not entitled to recover under the writ.
His Lordship-You've paid in. Mr. Kong Bing-Yes, but he to recover;
and I am entitled to ask for a non- wait.
not entitled
His Lordship-Well, we had better get on. Plaintiff was then put in the box, and after his evidence had been taken, the Court ross.
Mes E. 8. Kadoorie & Co. are in reosipt of telegraphic advices from Shanghai inform ing them that the Oriental Consolidated Gold Mining Co. Ltd. have declared a dividened of 60 cents (gold) per share.
con-
Before Mr. C. D. Melbourne at the Police Court on December 16th the case was tinned in which Young Fak-san, Yue Sui-san and Chan Kam-long were charged on several counts with conspiring to defraud, Mr. Otto Kong Sing and Mr. G. E Morrell (of Messrs. Dennys and Bowley) appeared for the prosecu. tion, and Mr. F.X.d'Almada e Castro (of Messrs. Almada and Smith) represented the defendants, Chan Kam-tong was further cross-examined. He said he lent Lam Ching-wah $5000, At the time of the loan he knew the borrower about half a month, but trasted to his broker regard. ing security.
What did you get as security for that $5000 ? Mr. Almada-I don't want to interrupt, but if my friend carries on the oross-examination in this way it will eat up the other cases. There is no prosecution in respect of these particular monies. The defendant is charged with obtain- ing from Chan Sing-on $500 by means of gambling or false pretences. My friend is oross-examining the defendant on the other charges, and I wish to hold the documents con- nected with those charges back to surprise the prosecution in cross-examination.
Mr. Kong Sing-You must not surprise them. You are disclosing your defeure already Mr. Almada-I am disclosing my defence in this case, but not in the others.
His Worship-I will note the objection, but I cannot prevent the question being put. What security did you get for that $5000? A written document. 'T'here was no stamp on it?—I don't know. Did you write it?-It was signed by Lam Ching-wah.
written and
Mr. Almada-Has this anything to do with the present charge, your Worship?
His Worship-What Mr. Kong Sing wants to God out is whether he had any money.
Mr. Almada-If he asked him that it would be sufficient.
Mr. Kong Sing--Would it? I want to prove that he had not and uerer money.
had any
His Worship-I cannot disallow the question, Mr. Almada-There is no question of your Worship's power to do so; and the king of such questions is not fair to the defence.
Mr. Kong Sing-I sabmit I am perfectly entitled to examine
this man as to his credibility.
His Worship-I cannot stop the question. And in exchange for it you handed over $5000 ? -Y88
|
Where? At 43, Queen's Road Central, on the first floor of the Man Wo Tailoring shop.
Who else was there?-The first defendant and Ching Wah.
You did not know Ching Wah was a big contractor when you advanced the money?—No, And you never brought an action for the amount?-No.
Did you
ever receive any interest-Yer, but I can't remember how much.
You told us Sing-on borrowed $800 7-No, I gave it as security.
To get you a position in the Sincere Co? Yes.
[December 23, 1907.
ber 26th. He was not the tenant of the house in Hollywood Road, but visited the second defendant, who was.
I put it to you, you have slept there ?----Well sometime you know when you go on a visit you are likely to fall asleep.
You're a broker, aren't you ?—Yes.
And formerly you were employed in Jebsen's ? -Yes.
While so employed did you ever see an un- stamped document given in soknowledgment of 8800 ?-That is a matter of trust.
Then you trusted this man you had known only a few days with $800?-It was not a matter of trust. It was a matter of employment. Further evidence was heard, and the hearing adjourned.
FLYING THE WHITE PIGEON."
A CURIOUS CHINESE FRAUD.
An unusual case came on for bearing before Mr. H. H. J. Gompertz at the Police Court on Dec. 20th, when Detective-Sergeant Watt prose- cuted Lee San and another for obtaining $70 by false pretenceS.
·
Young Sau was the first witness for the pro- instant the two defendants called at his father's secution. He told the Court that on the 1st
shop in Wing Sing Street when he was present. The first woman told him that her husband was dead, and that she wanted someone to support her. Then his father was spoken to on the subject, and it was agreed that witness ¡should take the first defendant . his coaoa. bine in consideration of payment of $70. The second defendant was the go-between, Witness paid the first defendant $5 aa bargain money, and he left the shop. On the 4th she returned and asked for $10 to redeem some- thing. This was paid, and again on the 9th both defendants called at the shop, and witness took them to his family house. There he procured $55, the balance of the amount agreed upon, which his mother handed to the first defendant. On the 13th the first defendant mid she was going away, so witness decided to take her before the Registrar-General.
There she admitted that her husband was alive,
The father of the former witness remembered the visit of the defendants to his shop. The first woman told him that she wanted to get married as she owed a lot of money and had no rice to eat. Her husband was dead, and she was willing to become a concubine. Witness offered her $60 to join his son's household, but she told him she would not take less than $70. He
agreed to this price, and the defendant asked him what would be a lucky day for her to join the son. He said the 9th instant, and it was arranged the final payment should be made on that day. On the 13th the defendant became ungrateful and was going to run away, so his son took her to the Registrar-General. Witness had pre viously told the second defendant to be on the lookout for a good and suitable woman for his
Bon.
After another witness's evidence had been
taken, the case for the prosecution closed, and defendants were asked if they wished to make
How did you first get to know Sing-on ?-Istatements. They did. was introduced to him by the first defendant.
And that was your last $80 you paid?- What do you mean? Do you expect a man would be penniless after paying away $80.
Yuen Fuk-sban, the first defendant, was next called to the witness stand. He said he had known Chan Sing-on about three months, and when he met him asked him to let witness know when there was a vacancy in Sincere and Co. Chan Sing-on said there was a vacancy, but he would want $1000 security. Witness then introduced the third defendant to Sincere's purchasing clerk, and the former paid Chan Sing-on $800 to get him a position in the Sincere Co. Witness could not say whether the money had been repaid. He had never gambled with the complainant, and had never sat at a gambling table with him to defraud the third defendant.
Did you ever teach him to play fantan ?— He is several tens of years old, and does not want a teacher.
Cross-examined---Witness did not introduce the complainant to the third defendant on Octo.
|
The first defendant said she told the first witness that she had no rice to eat, and had no work. He asked her to follow him, telling her that he had no wife and would feed her and give her clothing. He told her he would take her to the country, but she refused to go. The reason he wished to take her to the country was because he was afraid her husband would discover her. He told her that if her husband discovered her she was not to go back to him, but to ignore him and claim the witness as her husband. Defendant mid that could not be done because there was a child born. Defendant told her that she need has fo fear of ignoring her husband in Hongkong. Be- cause she refused to agree to his terms the wit- news suggested that she should go toʻnel the Registrar-General. He alsď taught her to say that he was her husband, that they were married in the country, and be brought her down to see the procession. She refused to do tàis, and the witness told the Registrar-General abe was flying the white pigeon. He also told her that he would boar false witness against her,
}Page 11