NAIL SUPPLEMENT TO THE - LUNGKÔNG DAILY PRESS, " AUGUST 28rx, 1809.
D. GILLIES, Secretary MR. NO D. HUMPHREYS TO THE BECHSTART
Hongkong, 2nd August, 1889. David Ollies E Secretary, Hongkong and
premated at this meeting. Howerhaps the in adopting the coumn of writing down until trimental to the best Interests of the Company result of the poll will give us more information. the awrdraft has been reduced to a safe point, I am, Bear Sir, Yours felthfully,
A ballet was then taken with the following (which object they have every hope of attaining in from two to three years; they consider thas rounl
For the amendment-1,230; against-405. the prosperity of the Company will be Leiter serval by so doing than by Increasing its capital. The amendment was therefore carried. The CHAIRMAN having, announced that the, Doar Sir, yours faithfully, dividend warrante would be ready on Thursday next, the meet.rg terminated.
PROPOSED INCREASE OF
THE HONGKONG AND WHAMPOA DOOK
COMPANY'S CAPITAL.
The following correspondance Les heen air cule amongst the shareholders of the Hong kong and Weapon Dook Company:--
• NO . HƠNENERYU TO THE SECRETARY,
Hongkong. 20th May. 1889. David Gillios, Esq. Storetary. Honkong and Whampas Dack Company, Limited." Dear Sir,I shell I trust be excused for bringing to the notice of the Directors the vory general opinion of the shareholders of the Com rapy as to the desirability of Buding some med of paying off the indebtedness of the Company without the accessity of any more writing down the value of the Company's property machinery and plant liable to deterioration exceptods, as this property is, in the opinion of thate well ahle to jalg worth more than the money at which it now grauds in the Company's booke
The shareholders or a great majority of them, Sojo that the Directors will give their host can- sideration to the advisability of increasing the Company' ospital by an amount sofficient to pay off the Trans contracted for the construction of the new Dock (except the Admiralty loans that they wentd in future recoivo in dividends the whole of the net earnings of the Company, and have the satisfaction of knowing that their money to involed in one of the soundest com- rial andertakings in the Far East, if not in the whole world'
Assuming that the indebtedness of the Com pany which it is desirable to pay off, amounts to about $1,000,000 un iners in the share capital of 50 per cent say $781,150), and it a Framiam of 75 per cent. to the shareholders, wants yield $976,6ft2, which would be sufficient for the purposu,
........ 31502.500
The present capital is The proposed no iss ..... 781,250
which leave a capital of
$2,343,750 for dividend and a Reserve: Fund free of cost to the Company of $195,372.
They see no reason to doubt that the Dock Company, during the next four yare, should do better than during the past four, as the next four will have the advantage of the earning power of the new dock, one of the largest and Bnost in the world, and which should attruct vole from.
yield by way of
the proposed increased
capital,"
June 3th, 1887
Dec. 31st, 1886
June 30th, 1988
Des, Stat, 183
Dre. 31st. 1999
June 26th, 188
$1.253.19
dividend
Balt-year endingNet enluge.
Den, 31st, 1835
June 30th, 1885
· Interset.
17,89.49
316,817.95
Tetai
Cazing
Lowe paid
Dividends
Available
141.1.7
$146,070.35
$103,076.36
119,555.41
162,708.85
212,$10.19
129,851.58
$144,533.01
91,101,32
455.71
79,913 50-
$4.939.41
32,561.65
27,706.50
20,831,20
3,794.90
51,195.25
111,578.18
119.107.91
110,888.91
166,303.75
279,623.18
158.185.7
£8,000.00
15,000.00
$15,000.00
205,3.ES
10,000,00
151,509.75
106.00
7.000.00
12.000.000
127,896.4/1
112,107.91
100,00
$355,999 $1,194,738,57
$83,000.00 $1,954,164 51
110,575.18
Suy equal to su average
yearly
dividend
of
D. GILLIEB
Secretary.
give some to Hip Tal Loong. On a subsequent and it was with diffoilty they are ultimately bed twiga delivudertlimaf-Yes, bay lord.. mid he had no money but he would arrange then not so anxions to compiste the continot. vonalon Mr. Pitman ald be would give Hip Tsi induced to complete all Mosers. Batter Leong $2,000 for the shalls, and then....... Bell and Swire won my arent in: Fooshow.No, my lord.
86,728 was the net amount receivet in Fooohow. Mr. Pollock-Did yon- **
106 shells were rejected. They were the Hin Tai Long shells. I disposed of 8-9 of their shell at 10, and I give them redit for that I agreed to take the low price because I could
Mr. FrancisLet him drish please,
them
Mr. Pallbok-Vary wall, and then- Witness-And then-**
and
You would paidat of these shells if they statement na to the $2,000 boing an advands and upts payment recount. If Lordship would Can and arabigunas the But afterwards you were note to do so Preamber bor vary
defendant was in his statements with regard te Did you give them say ates tot to nike aay this. He stated that the letter offering to lako these shelle oceras agent was given te Chan Yu more after tis 195 were finish: P-I did not.
You did not at any time tell them not to make Fal before the adrance was muda, Char' Yu,
Fal on the other hand denied thi‹ suð, stuhod any more F-No, my lord.
Did you export them to go on making any that he did not receive the letter nu il after the Whampoa. Dook Company, Limited
whals wore deposited in the gdow and the, DEAR BIRI wa in resept of your letter of
·His Lordship Very well go on, ad then "ant get say move. I tried on the negafla- more Yes, my love not paid for the 495 advance was made. In the two letters put in
Although they were the 29th ultimo in reply to mine of the 8th pre-
Witness-And then I went book. tions personally thrash the Canton authorities.
I found out after also in both cassi thare occarred the phr.se M. (80. D. HUMEKLEYS TO THE HOBETAGT.oeding.
and telegraphed to Batterield and Swira to I thought they would go Hongkong, 8th July, 1829. I regrat very much to bear of the decision of (Laughter);
Re-azamined by Mr. Francis-The $1,500 I being made of any adrazce from the Bank. David Gillies, Esq. Secretary, Hongkong and the Dirastors, the more so, because when I Brat Mr. Pollock-Was that $2,000 in full accept. I paid $1,000 to got the contract time wards they could not because they were involvent. My payment to Hip Tai Loong," pa mention Witness-No, that was on account. I deduct extended, and I chara Hip Tei Toong 8441 as Whampoa Dook Company, Limited. took this matter in hand I calculated upon
ad $125 from $2,000 and paid Hip Tal Loong the their proportion of that. It was absolutely paid to the sethorities was for the purpose of Ta faol there was nothing whatever to show that Deducing aeressary getting them to take the shells. It was not a this was not, an plaintiffs edaimad, a payout by Dar Sir, I am in receipt of your letter of its renting their approval. the 4th altims in reply to mine of the 20th
I am still of opinion that I have made out a balancer $125 was for past dobta to me. Mr.nacsary to pay that sn.
"I have had ex- their claim sad the counter-claire. May and am sorry to Bud that the Directors are strong con in support of the polloy I have ad- Pitona never told me that he had been damaged expenses in getting the shalts to Focobow. I renewal of the contract. If the Hip Tai Loong defendant on secut. Under all theke oiream His Lorrakip said he thought thers could be not is yet convinced of the advisability of in-vocated, and. I trust therefore cull endeavour by the delay of the Hip. Tal Leong in deliveries only recrived $1.451 for their shells, and. I had had not given me the 498 shells they could not stances he asked for judgmont for plaintific on
the Rhalle. He did tell me that the shells were advanced them $2,000, which I have sloce re- pombly have got rid of them.
lensive dealings with the Chinese Govern- to obtais its adoption
paid to the Bank with interest. crewing the nominal capital of the Company te over the increase in its working capital, se sag- I propose in the first instance to print the not up to sample.
Mr. Francis, in the course of his examiration, meat in azzas and shells, and I am of bu: litio doubt with regard to this Do The Cross-examined Mr. Pitman told me that he
BHkellbood of the action was for the balkive of the price of 100, opinion there was gretid by me, but I hope that my pressut letter correspondonee and eireniste it amongst the will put the views of the shareholders mora for shareholders generally, for their information. had a good deal of tronbla with the authorities naked for leave to amend the counterclaim
Mr. Pollock, at the nonclusion of the ommina Government Enying tlum shell from the Hip abalis under a contract executed on the 11th sibly before the Distors, and succeed in obtala- and place them in position to communicate in Foochow about these aballs. I went to see ing their cordial co-operation with the great their wishes to the Board.
Mr. Pitraan in June. The Hip Tai Long thee tinn, said that se far as he understood his learned Tai Long, al believe the 195 projectiles I saw August, 1885. The defence had suggested Hint majority of the sharebelders in placing the Com
I world ank you to be kind enough to inform ewed me about $2,000; now they owe me $4,500, friend was going to amend his counterstaim in January were all shell. I bara had ne dethey had a right to set aside that contract on shells, and for myself with my owa. I mada noi completion. In paretianós of time to pay in a sound position financially, which thor me if there is any Fondation for the ramour holda bill of sale on their stook and premisen altogether. What was claimal originally was sire from the beginning to end of this matter two grounds: that the shells were not up to do ust consider it to be in at present.
that has been current in the colony for somo lo Jane, 1886, I had a Chinese bill of sale on the difference between 83.35 and 310.50 per shell; except to do the best I could for them with their sample, and that there was an unreasonable dolay Iannot for a moment agree with your own days past, based upon information maid to be them. x. Pifman did not say he could not get and that was bow the $2,000 was morte up.
Bis Lordship and that what was meant was claim against them because this would have been grounds the defendant, exeraised bis right to tention that the policy of writing down assets as given by some of your Directors to their friends, money from the Foochow authorities because of necasion offers is either sind, wise, or safe, to the effect that an incress of capital in some the delay in duirorur the shells. I cannot re- the difference between $5.10 and 88, which de-seftied when we came to edirst, the accounts. repadiate the contrast. The defendant advanced both here and to Focolier by my agents were not not as payment on the shells, but es agent the sets be, as I shall be prepared to show later, way had been determined upon by the Board-Imember Mr. Fitmas saying that the shalla were fendant now. said was the price at which the The payments made for freight, insurance, &c. $2,000 to the plaintiffs which he stated wa
not according to pattern I told Mr. Pitman sholle were to be said.
Mr. Francis said that so far no damages for claimed against me till the accounts were finally for the plaintifa, to whom the aballa still be worth much more money than the amount at renais, Dear Sir, Yours faithfalls,
that Hip Tai Long was in a state of insolvency. which they stand in the Company's books If
Tai Loong, but I did for them Hentically the mazer, but not in performance of any part of that part of the cantarelain
the contrast. The defendant also stated t the ants are worth the money or more, and you
did my beat to persuade him to help thom.loss of contract were concorned, he withdrew Bottled. I held theee shulls as grant for Hip longed, and he at their friend, advanced this Mr. Frandis, in boning die case for the defen. By Mr. Pollock-I made the agreement for same as if they had beau my own.. wist te set aside a portion of the earnings la a
dant, suid that at the time defendant entered into the 405 shells with Wong Wab Kea. I think Mr. Francis' aid it was admitted as regards having obtained $2,000 for thom he kept the tim of prosperity as a Boferre Fead, or for the equalization of dividends, it should be so stuled,
this contract with the plaintiffs he had pending no one else was prement. I was present when the contract between the plaintiffs and defen shelle and incurred certain expenses in cour that the trio nition of the Company may be
Dear Sir, I am in receipt of your letter of three or four differat contrasts for the supply Wong Wah Kon rate his evidence before the dauf, that the plaintiffs undertook to manfatios with them which Acaded this 2 S in the State asat of Accounts, and not s the position based on an artificial or arbitrary the 2nd instant, and in reference to the less of arms, guns, shot oft shells, and ander 20 Comel at Canton. I heard him say that either ture 1,300 shile, and the defendant andertook to felt board to remark, as Mr. Po look porntent saltation for the purpose of getting rid of in paragraph of samo, which alone calls for reply, particular contrent be had to supply a vertails Wong Yan or Fox Sui was present. I think take them and pay for then provided they weren't that the defendant at firs denied huring come aroud and scorid, and which ought theco beg to inform you that my letter of the 24th number of Ariustreng guns and a certain aam- neither of them vas present. I did not tell equal to sample Defendant had refused to take made the contractssplaintiff stated, and seconilly
altime conroyed the views of the Directors as aber of rounds of ammavilion to the Chinese for to be shown to exist.
I cannot quite understand whom you meas by body, meaning that the majority of them were authorities. The gass were applied, but there him that if he lid not make them at the them, and the two points in dispate were when the plaadings he stated that the shells wore o'd shareholders," to whom you thick it would of that opinion. und that, s far as I am aware happened to be some four or five hundred rounds rate of five a day I would not take them. ter the shells were in to sample and as to not up to samp, ant at the last moment he ut and 320,000 was kept bank outil per complained to Wong Wat Kee that the whether there was any agrement or under- up the defonos of delay in delivery. However, left thuir sorvian. I coraplained to the firm within which the shells ware to be suppliot. He it had to be dealt with. The contract was mode be asjust to adopt this view. If still shareholders there is no foundation whatever for the rumourshort
two or threother contracts pending at the through my set, Captain Broadhurst, and abmitted that although there was to express on the 13th August, and as evidence of that. they are unaffected by past writing down sad that they have determined te increase the Cen- these shot and shells were supplied. Thare wow she were not delivered in time, because be had standing between the parties as to the time there was the telonce whenever it was made, and will share in any benet with present now share puy's capital in any way. 1 remain, Dear Sir,
same time, but it was quite clear that it was when I came back from Shanghai I complaizal agreement as to any defuite time gamed, it was there was a memorandum and an entry is n with D.GILLIZE
Ference to this particular contract holders. But if you allude to those who sold at Yours faithfully.
Secretary, during the height of the Company's prosperity, or were forced to loss during the bad time which follected (traugh ne fund having been droated for the eqnalistina of dividends,) and they no lower hold shares in the Company, they have nothing whatever to do with it and cannot rosive consideration at your hands.
if
In taking the 'avorage net earnings of the Company for the last two years, in preferenco to my average for four, you show that on this basis which I presurer yon think a fairer one than my four years' average) that the Company sould only show a dividoof of 4.7 por seat. for each half-year on the proposed increasi mominal capital of $233.750 as suggested by me, and only then. without making any provision for depreciation or bonus to contributing shae- haldera. Depreciation of Flant'sad Muchitary
JNO. D. HUMPHREYS.
THE SECRETARY TO ME, JNO, D. BUMPHESYS Hongkong and Whumpes Dock Co., Ltd Hongkong 3rd August, 1889. Jn. D. Bemphreys, Esq.
SUPREME COURT,
25th August.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
BioR MR. FIELDING CLARKE, ACTING, CHIEF JUSTICE.
FOX SUI AND ANOTHER PUMAS-
defendant.
He had no
to
*There
work
that the contract with Hip Tai Long was ally. I did not write the letter. I understood in all outracts of this kind that they rote lusk, made at the same time. In this wude. As already stated, defendant had to agreed with Chan Ya Fai personally to get the should be finished and completed in a ressao-contract Mr Pitost agroad to pay $9 for deliver a certain number of shells and it was advance from the Bank in the 26th, or 27 able time, He eubmitted they would have been certsia shalin and $3.23 for others. found that there are some 2.380 sbelly short Jan, 1886. The advance was stranged with manfactured at the rate of five shells per day was nothing in the contract with regard to than
·Ïé nasood that in the absenes of any WEB not ou naressonable rate. 1,59, whele poot and $20,000 was kept back until these were de- the Bank on the 8th Jane. The Bank would and the evidence we to show that that for the parforsnes of it or time for the pay.
not have given an advands #zless the shalb bað hir. livered to the authorities at Fooshow. Pitraan had some shells biraself and among the beer in the godown. I got the godown resipt at anything bike that rate could have been mention of tin for the performance of the on measures taken to fulfil this contruct with the frora Chan Yn Fi and then I negotiated with finished by the following April and plaintiffs track there wasld be imported into the contract the Bank. The sidoration for delivery was themselves stated that in February they coudition for reasonable desgarch, and that in authorities was the order given to Hip Tai that Labould get the Bank, Ido not know that had only 496 finished. Mr. Pitman said that the absent fuy express condition as regards Loong for 1,3 shells. That contract was made in Augast and in the middle of September Mr. theshells were in the godown on the 25th. If they who he returned to Hongkong in February payment, the work should be paid for a de- Pitman was to Stangboi, and did not rofuru toera y agreement with Chau Ya Faimont have 400 shelle were only actually completed and 100 iivered from time to thes. It bad bean sag- besa before that date. The contrae: on the 45% were in the rough. It was perfectly clear that gested na the part of the defendant that the Hongkong again till January, 1886. During shells was with the Hip Tai Loong, not with plaintiffs had never flashed more than 495 a liability of the plaintiffs was to make all they should that time Captain Broadharet, now anfortab- Wong Wah Keepersally; they were part of der their contract. Author point in dispats these shells complete, before they retired stuly dead, came to. Hongkong as Mr. Pit-
the 1819. I know the 106 rejected ebells were was whether there was any agreement to pay for a cent of payment. that was This was a claim for $2,159, the balance dusmane representative and looked after the manu; | vårt of the 195 bɛeruse the Chinese authorities there shells 100 by 100 as they were complated, do upwards at $11,000 wori of or certain abells made for defendant.
Mr. Pollock, instructed by Meters Caldwall facture of these shells. The shells were not told me so. They were identided because they One of the plaintifs mid that was so, hot oa before receiving any payment. Ife did not
randy when Mr. Pitman got back and 496 shel
stand they are lid, not shells. Among the to the fact that though the firm End become of this kind be have such at at all but tast all parts of the East and render it practicable for mast he allowed fer of course, and for the sake and Wilkinson, wae for the plaintiffs, and were uitiumtely delivered. In consequence off were of a different patloro. As far as I under the other hund bowould all his lordship'sattention think that it was ever intended in a contract var own and other Governments to send larger of argument, I accept your percentage, which is Francis, Q.C., inatruoted by Mr. Webber, for the the delay in the completion of the shell, the 1.319 there were about 500 which Wong Wab solvent during the next nine months they Dover Was understood that psymeat should be from - Vesels to this Statica. As a matter of fact this equal to 2.4 per cent. dividend for the year, less
Tus pleadings filed in the caso showed that authorities refused to here anything to do with es personally had made for me apart from the made any clain to be paid for those shells 100 by time to time as the shells were delivered. That Dock has bera fally occupied ever since its war and tear and bonus to contributing share.
holders, abost 1 per sunt, equal to say 84 yearly plaintiffs claimed 82,158, balanor due to the the contract retained $20,000, and refused to Hip Tai Leone Aletter from witness to Messrs. 300 as they were completed. On this point tharo war what he believed. Defundnut had stated completion.
If it be convsted that with this great increase dividend, against my 115 per cent. yearly plaintiffson onrtain shells made for the defendant accept the shells, and it was only with great Caldwell and Wilkinson was pat in, in which he was a conflict of evidence and it was for bie lod-that he had told the plaintiffe that he was under in the Dock Company's earning power (and the dividend, and I will now ask you if you will be defendant denied the claim and set up a coar-difficulty later that Mr. Pitman, by making proid, in reply to the claims, that the contract was ship to say which story he would accept. What contract with the Chinese authorities, and that He admitted the result was that in February only 496 shells that they had told him they could make them at A commencement of an oru of busincer prosperity kindly inform me whether it was upon this tar osim for 33.311. The plaintiffs are engineers soute to the junior offins is estomary with Woag Web Kee and that he never knew over the terms of the contrast might have been he wanted the shells a quickly as possible, and all oro the world, the pot earnings of the prospect that you proposed, on behalf of the carrying on business at No. 107, Queen Read in dealing with Chine-induced the authorities Hip Tai Luong in the maltar. Company during the ensuing four years should Directors, to accept my suggestion of loreasing under the name of Hip Tai toong. Defobdant to take over the shal, and even then be bad to the latter. but add the statement that his deal-ware finished and at that time, he submitted, the rate of five or six shells per day. Plaintiffs merchant carrying on business in Canton makes great reduction in the price. The non-ings had beon with Worg Wai Kes porsmally fituan had a right to repudiate the con- en theother hand asserted that the defendant ask equal. if not excbed, those of the past four years, the nominal capital if we would agree to take is
perfectly justified in refusing to take the 485, promised to curry out the work in a resouxbir thai ho bad 2,080 to short time. He (his lordship) had no doubt that it will show that the shareholders have some the new issue at 50 per cent premium instead The plaintiffs claim for goods sold and delivered alivery of these shells by the Hip Tai Leong was szistake. The Ban't advanced the mouny tract entirely on the ground of delay. He wased them to be as ghick-or-they could, and they
By bis Lordsip-The plaintiffs applied for which. Being
Tseless to him, something of that kind did odear, and that in the solid foundation for their confidenes in recom- of at 25 premium as suggested by me? Because and work done, namely 495 gun shells at $8.38 was simply caused by their state of itsolvency
supply, ware practically manding this course, if we take for the last four the shares at 25 per cent, premium on this basis ech, caolis hire, iuenzance, &c., making a total of and their inability to get a supply of iron to witness perscally, not for some one else.
monoy at that line anticient to pay for the yours the net strings of the Dock Company, wald only yield 64 per cent. par aupum, aut if $1,18. On the 20th June, 1886, the platãtiffs Thus they were only able to supply 406 shelis plus interest and winus fupas paid to contri- you are right in your alculation, you wern received $2,000, leaving a balance still dus of and those were only inished after several paywest when Iontse back in February. I be hoy had it fo oridance that Mr. Pitman conversation it was mentioned that they could Ho must buting shareholders, and see what the net manifestly wrong in making dequiescenes in our $2,1 which they now seek to recover. De mouths of arrearenable delay. When these ells. Betwees that and Jure it would have band complained of this delay as had also his make tive or six shells per day, without it being shelin wore inspected they were found to been inconvenient for me to pay them. I never agent both by word and by letter, and silber recorded as a term of the agrummert-that-they- reraniudor would
on wishes dependent upon our paying 50 per cent fendant states in his answer that on anti 1,950 bo distinctly inferior to the sample, and whex bold har tu fai that I had not coney enough, the plaintif's nor Chan Ya Fai had ever repudiwers to make that unmbar por day
premium for what you yourself endeavour to 13th August, 1885, he ordered of plaintiffs
in Jane the Jael witan came to r. Pit
his lordship to decide between the evidence of there was euch unreasonable delay as entitled show to be worth less than we were prepared to shells and agreed to take them provided they my. Your estimate, however of the faturo net were in seriance with a certain pattern. The mis and reported plaintiffe state of insolvenor After this transaction I always dealt with the e, contradicted or denied that. It was for now loads at the piroumstances and. He whether His Lordshipdirceted the witness's afteation Mr. Pitman and Chan Yu Fai but it meal be defendant to refuse to pay for Carse shalls, shells earnings of the Company, available for dividend plaintifa made only 495 shells and when these and urged him to take these shells and do the abelle as my ow on the basis of the last two years, in altogether wore tendered for delivery, they were found not beet be could and sell them at almost any prior to the fact that when the advance of $3800 was remembered that Chsa Yu Fai was an interested which he admitted were of no male to the incompatible with this confident hope expressed to be in scordance with the pattern and the to the Fanchow Gorerament, Mr. Pitmanaged received from das Bank on the 094 shells the party as he was a heavy creditor of the plaintiffs plaintiffs and would be thrown or their hands, by the Directors in the List paragraph of your whole were rejceted. In or about June, 1826, the to take them, not under the original contract latter, that they will be able to write down the the defendant, as agent for the plaintiffs, agreed but only as their agent, endeavouring to sell at plaintiffs, only received 32,000, little more than e submitted that Mr. Pitman, inasmuch as This spicement was made in August and plain- said by would ask him when the Court sat again during the delay ho tad over and over again and out of their manufactory frequently up to the overdraft to us safe point in two or three years to mil the 495 shells at such a price as he could the best price he could get. It was on that con-alt, silhough B of the shella wara thaire, and there had been au unaonable delay, and that tiffs sat sent the work. The defendant was in for an acount showing that after deducting ex threatened to reject the shells, had full power 25th September, when he left for Shanghai by deductions from profits earned-84 pr obtain, sud be obtained on the security of these dition only that he took the shell.
taking over of the sila Huomitted that When he enne book 400 of these shells were out on a spital of $2.343,750 $196,875, and shells an advance from the Hongkong and dy money in hand but he had no difficulty in pensas for freight, insurance, etc., that was the reject them. And now as to the subsequent where he remained till the following February..
aming that a. asfe limit for an overdraft far Shanghai Bank of $2,000 which the plaintifs getting an adence from the Bank on these paper proportion for them to have received.
The Court des adjourned until half-past tan when Mr. Fitmnu took over there 493 shells he finished and 96, partly so and as pleiatifs did did so, net under the ad contract but as agent no farther werk no doubt these wore the 195 a working business of this class is one year's not received. Detendunt afterwards sold 389 of the belly and $2,000 wao svarood to the Hip Tat
for the plaintiffs. Would Mr. Pitman after which were mbsequently placed in the godown. these delays be likely to take over a small It was now.admitted that nona of the shalla profits, it would take the entire met earnings of Balls at the best price he could get fer Long, which money was simply advanced on the next morning. the Company, on your estimate, over two years them; the other 106 being worthless be could the representations of Chan Yu Fai. In order to
27th Angost.
number of the shell which it was doubt ware rejected by the Chinese sethorities that to realize the expectations of the Directors, not sell, and they are now lying in Fonchus sell these Mr. Pitman had to inour considerable
The hearing of this case was rasutned. ful whether he could get rid of, and accept part of the casu having broken down. One of the laving no dividend at all for the shareholders in Arenal at the order of plaintiffs. The 359 shells trouble and expense in disbursing money. Of sold by the defendant realised $1,451 and do these 496 shells 108 were refused as worthless, the meantime.
Cross-examination of Mr. Pitman by Mr. the entire responsibility and probable logs un plaintiffs said that those shells were finished in These shells were Novewter, the other one said in December. De Your contention that the nominal capital of fondat paid that ens into the Bant. Defend. and were stil lying at Foochow at the order of the Company is large enough for its bustness, ant had slao to make good the balance of 1 to Hip Tai Loong. For the shells Ar. Pitman Follock until I was informed by the Fonder the whole contract: whan the working capital actually exceeds it by the Bank, and states that plaintiffs are indebted venived 85.10 per shell, nod claims for neosary chur Government that the 168 projectiles retaken under a new contract is which Mr. Fit, fendant did not know permally when they start & million dollars, will not hold water for a to him for that sama. Defendant also claims expenses being devoted, left a balance of$1,451.jected were shot and not shells.. I said yester-man was agent, aze si sach be got an advance wore Baishad, bassise he first saw them when he Mr. Pitaan had advanced $2,000 which he had to day that when I went in January, 1933, to the of ready money, sent be shells to Forchow, and returns izom Shanghai in February. The moment, and I cannot accept your conciation $3,000 from the plaintiffs for non-delivery of inke good leaving a balance due to Mr. Pitman Hip. 91 Loong. I saw 4 shells ready and 95 endeavoured to get the best possible price for paintiffs tuon claimed payment for the sold
connection with the pictedshells, and stepped work because they hat the Company, owing nearly a million dollars the 1.250 bolle.
of $549. Ite (Counsell submitted to his lord nearly ready. I charged the 441, which I paid them. The accents in to its Bankers and Secretary, is in a stronger Wong Yenug said I am one of the plaintiffs ship that the question resolved itself into this is the Canton authorities for saten-sale at Foochow which were in dispute warn of ust get paid his lordshship) dat not see position to snent a estivus opposition than if it in this case. Fok Sui is my partner. We carry in plastics failed to carry out their rotract as a bribe to the Canton the potatis. It was small importance. The only point Mr. Podlesk sug reason to doubt paintiffs' story that these
raised was as the the $1,500 psid by Mr. Pitman shells were finished before the end of the yeaY — on business as engincere under the style of Hip within causosable time-and failing to do so the through my infuence that the contract was ex wed no money except to its stareholders. On
In 1985 our firm contracted to the contrary, I believe that the present indented. Loung
sholle. It seemed to him that there bolug Do Ex- ocus of the Company is the any aspect in ile make some gun shells for the defendant. The Chinese anthorities repudiated the extract and tended. I was bebind time with the contract, for extending the contract Mr. Pitman said and they wore it end to him exercising alt
of these shelle had be not spent this moonBy affairs which avites opposition. Free from debt, contract was made in defendant's uice. I sad threw it back on Mr. Pitan's bands. The but it was also for the benefit of the plaintiffs to that he would never have been able to get rid ressonable despatch to the manufactors of the press condition in the contract as to timeitmust be ind with a capital of 32,3451.750 of its own teinther partners were present. Wong Wah,tract was repudiated simply and solely be have it orteadul."
Bie Lordabi Yan say the 206 projectiles amongst the mince oficials, zad as anyone whe money, represented by assets worth considerably one of the partners, conducted the making of the cause plaintiffs were not ready to deliver the
Witness Taninformedse by the Government. was always anossary in such ossos, and it was patch and he was of opinion that they did more than their book value, and a Resorts Fund contract with the defendant. Lefendant made 100 stells within reasonable time. As to Mr. vore rejected because they were shot, not shells? knew anything of Chinese affairs know, this understood that they must use reasonable des But you examined them P-No, my lord. unly for his lordship to say whether he thought resonable despeto in making these ebells. of $193,312, serious opposition would be out of memo, of the contrast. We were to make Fitowan's Ralling these 496 shells, be did that
Lair And reasonable amount With regard to them not being up to sample When you want to the Hip Tal Loong in Fe-thie mas the question, because It could not hope to sac 100shells at 89 each and 900 at 38 33 each.. We merely as their agent. He did not accept those caed, or give a return upon its capital, working niede 495 shells for the plaintiff. When I stod 490 shells under the original'enatract,
Joku Pitsu, rehaut, residing in Canton,trary you saw 400 shells ready and 05 near expended on behalf of the plaintiff. In the re- there was nu evidence on that point and be sit the Foochow maturities took over the shella thought it was perfectly clear that defendant. against an ok stablished business possessing Mr. Pitman for payment for those he told wo orery facility, and which could, if needs must to ge on making the others. Mr. Pitman never said-At times I have had very large commis ly roofy P-Ya, my lord.
You looked at these P-Yes, my lor
and paid 35.10 por shell. Now as to the reduction had entirely failed in that part of his cras and made for the 106 rejected. Mr. Pitman received it was therefore cry to say anything.. And they wire all shells Yes, my lord. work for its ourrent expenaak and without profit, complained to me as to the shells not being metasona for tho Chinese Government. In 1885 T I told defendant when the 495 had two costruets pending with the Foochow
Then I think we can assume that they were information that that 106 were manufactured more about that. He found, therefore, that there. You are mistaken in impating to me a desire to pattern. to place a heary buries upon the Company by elifs were ready that I was hard preased for authorities for the supply of eight seven inch increasing its capital. This heary burden exists maey and asked him to take delivery of the shells. Armstrong gans The contract is dated 14th the 495 shells delivered. Elow could a portion by Hip Tat Loong. It appeared fairly clearly no resonable delay as regards the de 114 now. Its existence commenced to date from the. He said he had no money and told me not to make November, 1884 (Contract read. Those gung of them become shot while being transferred since that these could not have been the plain livery of these 400 shells and that might end Mr Pitmen admitted that the abells be def of evidence as to a second agreement entered per cout, exclusive of the net sarrings of the day upon which the Disators, on their own any more shells. I had no more capital to go on had to come from Japan. We know there to Fonebor 2-1 was informed by the Govern- tiffs' because they worn shot and not shell, dispose of the case, but there had been a great
responsibility, decided upon the construction of making the remainder In January, 1986, I felt was only 500 shells to be got from there. I meat that 106 wer's shot.
Do yon mein that the plaintiffs, after you at Hip Tai Loong'a were all shells, end into between the partins by which defondant If the Directors will take this matter in hand the New Dook. The working capital has the rail and Fok Bei managed the business. We think eight guns and their apporteuance were
delivered in Foochow about March or April, had examined the shella, substitated shot for plaintiffs Rt be oredited with 108 aholis was to act as agent for the plaintiffs. 4 de at $5.10 each. This would reduce the balance fendut bad atated that he could have paid for they will recipe the boarty support and thanks fore been increased. The thing is done. The olim from defendant $2,152.
Cross-examined by Mr. Francis-In the non 1885, but they were neverthelens acospted. I am them PE de ut say that, my lord. of the whole of the shorebolders with sunreely an only question at inane now is this: Is it as a
Might not those rejected have been others of the $2.000 due to Mr. Pitman to 315. Be the shells in February, hat that subsequently exceptivam, Dear Sir, yours faithfully," matter of Heard beslaws more desirable that trict it is mentioned that the shells were to be certain it was not before that time. The 1,300
take over three shellaan they were not finished into get their money and could not, and as defoud- JNO. D. HUMPHRETE. the Company should one this large increase of of three kinds. I had smples of two kinds shells I wanted from Hip Tai 3.oung were wanted thru these manufactured by the plaintiffsubmitted that Mr. Pitman was not liable to he could not do so. The plaintiffs said they vied Under a fresh ant admitted they were pressing him to take these capital, to which it has already been, irrevocably only. e. Pitman told me bo wanted these for the Foscbowarscual 195 ofthe common shells They might have hea
were wasted for this contract, When I entered Do you produce the
Agreement he had procured an advanos shells over, there could be little doubt that plain- THE SECRETARY TO ME, INO, D. HUMPHRETS committed to its Bankers and Seeratary, or to shells for the Chinese Government in Foochow
partner, Wong Wah Koe. I made an entry in You made sit this account last night Yes, for the plaintiffs' temporary accommodation and kills were pressing him to take delivery as they as their agent had endeavoured to dispose of wanted their money. Matters went on in this shareholders? There mupol be two opinions as wathorities for 1,300 shells. I promised Mr.
these shells His Lordship had calonlated that way for some time and then the plaintiffs Company, Limited.
to the answer. It can make no difference to the Pitman I would do my utmost, but I did not hia book. He said they should be annde is quick my lor
What did you charge the plantlife for storage tnt of this advanos a fair proportion for Mr. etaployed a friend, Chan Yu Eas, for the pur Hongkong, 24th June. 1889.
Bauk whether it edranous this money to its mention to bia any number that. I would make ly as possible and at the rate of five or six a day. Jno. D. Humphreys, Esq.
olients as shareholders on the scurity of their ina day. No time was hired for the completion I told him I had a castrast to full with the sad insurance-$75.
At the rates oharged what does it amount to Pitman to have pail to the plaintiffs would havepose of trying to get their money for them. biez $9,720, but with all respect he put it to his Chan Yn fui went and tried to get payment DEAR SIR-Your letter dated the 20ti ultima shares, or to the Company as a whole. I men of the contract. After the moulde were ready Fooshow and Swatcw authorities. I told him I was laid before my Dirveters, and the varios tion this as it was considered last this was a bad I would malta about 150 a month. We made 110 had a contract for 2,000 ommon shells and 1,800 ou the 694 ebrils P-8241.
I told him I was gatting A Why then did you only charge them 375 as Lordship het as Mr. Pitau had incurred from defendant. It had been suggested that arguments therein brought forward in support time to call up more capital. But as I asid boshells at 29 for Mr. Pitosan and got the money special shells.
delivering the shells, and the firm baing in-time, because he was a creditor of plaintiffs and me fair price to charge them. of the proposal to increase the mpital of the before, this question does not arise at all; it is for them. Weng Wah Keeloft our firm in Febru- good price and could afford to pay well for their proportion I twaght that would be a trouble and expense in shipping, storing, and Chan Yu Bai had a personal interest at that This is not a copy of the account you want insolvent at the time, I would be very improbable that he was interested in keeping this money, Commaus by a further iseve of new ebarcs, re only a question of transfer from one secount to ary, 1888, batikesesbells were ant made by him. I them. He was making 100 shella for
dennot remember the data when these were mile at that time under a previous extract. I ceived their ea:aost consideration, and word Eally other accourts, on realízabla seorities in place I know the Kin Haag Shop. Iknow Ping Kes understood Wah Kee and another firm were to them?No, it is an estimate that I made that he would roosivaanything from them, and is but he only retained $125 when he did get the was fully justifed in keeping back $700 for er- money and handed over the rest. It had stro diapusund at several Board meetings.
of overdraft.
A matter of fact he had to pond bsen szxgested that he was an interested party In reply. I am instructed to inform you that.
He had being still a creditor, but he (his lordship! was After examining your figures 1 oasinot agree I was heavily indebted to him for iron. I do making them. They were paid for. I wont last night.
The figarosare not the same as in the accountresses. after looking at the matter very urefully in with you that my estimate of a million dollars of not remember that had any difflenity is get-away fu Shanghui on the 23rd September. 1885,
and returned on the 30th or 31st January, 1886. you sent them -No. met exactly the same, much more on Leball of the plaintiffe.
éerne to the couchsion that the comh terclaim astified that bis eridanes was reliable. Chun every direction and always keeping in view the borrowed expital was in excess, as you say ting iree to make those bells. I produce an
What did you get from the Bank on these must be abandoned, and he asked Lis Lordskip for Yu Fai rent lato negoliations with the judyment for his client or the claim of the defendant, but it was quite clear to his his and the beat and permanent interests of the Company, the You yourself give the amount of overdraft and entry is my book of the delivery of 110 shells I was not in Hongkong between those two date, roughly they are the same
lordship's) mind from the letters Directori dohat entertain the course of action a lame as 3865,000 (exclusive of Admiralty loans), at to Mr. Pitman, and the money for thoso Between the date of the contract and the date of
You say ye only charged the plantit $75 plaintiffs. set forward in your letter with any favour for and this is near enough, as a caly propose was paid on the 21st September, 1885. The my departure I went to the Hip Tai Loong shells $5.10 per shell.
Mr. Pollock said he was surprised to find that godown recipt that Chen Yn Fai pat the they are strangly of opinion, that the policy of that the Company should pay dividend on money was paid to Wah Kee. At that time he Reveral times to show they were getting ou
bis learned friend led abandoned the counter defendant in control of these shotis before As a member of our firm. There were no They were casting the shells but had not put for storage and insurance F--Yes, my lord.
And you pad 3241 P-Yes, my lord. writing down as cocasion offered, hitherto pur 8781,250 new capital and put the premium
Did you chim the balanos from them after claimaltogether and had passed over in his spouch the advance was made. Then there was the ened by them, is the safest and it to fellow $193,312 to reserve, free of cost to the Company, complaints as to the way in which these shelle them in the lathe. I think there were 200 cast.
In reduction of
anything about the shells not being up to the letter of the 29th June the one in which de were made Tu November, 1885, 495 shells wore I was never mentiqued of worgested that I Were a different concus to be taken now, and to strengthen its position,
That was after this notion was commenced, sample, and the only point to which he had di. feudsub stated he would act as agent for plain- Chau Yu your proposal adepted it would be muuifastly un- working capital, you caret aut off against your Enished. Mr. Pitman norer refused to take should take and pay for each hundred abelle weds Yes, my lord, in my countoreisia. just to the old sbareholders who have submitted indebtedness the outstanding accounts due to them. I do not know when he took them. It they were ready. While I was in Shanghai I
Although what was done by you in selling did not appear in the pleadings. He should be Fal, said he never got that laster until after the. to the large amounts written off in former years. the Company, which yun put down at $930,000, was during the time I was away sick. In had my assistant, Captain Broadhurst, bers look Did you sleitany thing before that P-Nn, my lord, rected attention had been that of delay, which affs which defendant relied on wors increased to $2,943,750, as suggeted by you must always have mousy owing to you in Just before completing them Mr. Pitman said the stantly on the jest. After my rotors
Even supposing that the company's capital because as long as you continuo to, da bosinoes, November, 1485, the 495 shells were completed. ing after the matter. He wrote to we, those shells for them was done out of kizdueen glad to know whether his Lordship wished, his money was advanced, sud he was quito sure that received that latter first. The evidence as to thin being up to sample. you and also suppring, for the sake of argument, proportion to the business deze, and I do not money was not ready to pay for the whole of the went round about the beginning of February-Yes, my lord, 1 disposed of them out of kind to address him on le point of the shoils not would not have taken the money if he had Now is it not curious that in this secount vou Die Lordship-There is not the slightest poletter was very conflicting. He (his lordship) did not like to judge of these things too much on that the Future Lusiness of the Company should consider the amount you as an excesive soils, and that we were to stop as soon as the I found there were only about 400 shells finishedness to the plintis prors neither bettor or worse than that of the amount for the Company to hare in oatatanding 45 we pleted. I never made any shells and about another hundred still in the rough,
with gas checks for Mr. Pitman,
Socie ware shot and some shell. The 400 finish-bring the amount to be advanced to ibens after cessity to do eo.
Mr. Ponek sal as to the shuils not being probality but he did not think it mnoh matter. last two years little or no benefit would be encounte
Reexamined Mr. Pitman did not tell med were very badly casi, with air Loice in them, paying expames to exactly 32,000 -That is an
delivered up to tid, his Lordship would red which story was accepted, because the letter derived; for you would find that, when Director": Your statement in reference to the New Dook
Bat now you ustimate it at that arm to a dent? member that the plaintiffs claimed that 425 st Save been written after defendant gut pos and Auditors' fees had been deducted, the net is also somewhat misleading. You say so far what price he was going to get from the Chinese tasty, and in vory inferior condition. I saw estimate.. earnings would only admit of an average divid from having been fully occupied during the 18 authorities for these shells. The 110 shells were man named Weng, who I think was the book- end of 4.7 per cent. for each half-year and that monthe sinos. it was opened, only four vessele not part of the contract for 1:800. I have for keeper. Wah Kee. I think, was not in Hong--I think your lordship will not as it is $2,000 shells were completed in Tecember. This concession of the shells and therefore made an al- kong at the time Iaw Fok St, And Wong exactly to ant. I made this estimate to shew tract was entered into on the 13th August, so teration in plaintiffs' position. These shells that the interval was about four monthe and remained in the godowns until October, 1887. without making any provision for either dopee buve been placed in it." I believe the Dook, gotten the date at which they were fulubed. vation or bears to contributing shareholders. though opened for the dragen, was not fuished Fok tui, partner in the firm of Hip Tai suted as interpreter. I told them would set you on what based may account.
Yes, but 1racted to know what you based your balf. This amounted to about 100 while per and were delivered to the authorities. It seem- The facilities of the Company have dartainly evan then. It was previously opened (tempor- Loong, said-I remember in Angust, 1885, the take shells of moh inferior manufacture, as they been largely increased of late, but if the year arily) for the reception of a war vessel, and about emtriet being made with the defendant abeat would be rejected at Fachos, and also that they account on thes, not now. Did you not, now, flad month or more than three shells per day. It ed to his Lordship that upon the facts there was 1856, in which the profits were sbormally large 18 months ago it was temporarily opeord for the the shells. We mude 495 shella altogether: had been so long about them that the Fotobor that the print of the abells amounted to 32.762.56 was quite tree that one-plaintiff had stated to no etidence of an srensy on the part of the de- be excepted, there has been so sach improvement reception of two Chinese craisers, and then eles. The reason they were not delivered sooner was authorities had threatened to cancel the contract. and then put down the expenses at 87.50 to Mr Pitman that they might be able to tar fendant. It appeared to him that defendant had in yusiness as would justify inoreasing the capital ed again.
because we could not get the money from the Between my return and June, 1886, when the make your advance of 22,000 correot? I simply out five shells per day, but they had not agres no interest whatever in the delivery of these
on the 8OPE 98, 50 per orat. The Direnters are assured that I trust that with the misconceptious removed, defendant. I was managing the business whide 498 shells wore delivered, Chan Yn Fai setimated the charges roughly for your to do so. Taking defendant's own evidence shells except under the original contract. He about March, lordship to use on what basis I had charged in ba had admitted that in February, 1886, was of opinion that it was after the defendant the present capital is quite large enough for the and this further light thrown on the matter, the Weng Yeang was 11. I carried ou negotiations appeared Company's business, and that as inurease in the Directors will readily see their way to fall in with the defendant through Chan Ya Fai: pe 1 and told me the Pip Tai Loong were the accouste. I put the expenses at about $700 000 shells were completed and ready for delivery bad got possession of the shells, that he gave him instrostions largely in his debt, and were in an insolvent in reality the expenses are more than that which would giveärste of manufacturo of shout made the representations as to his acting as evant of serious opposition, would place the oom with the views and wishes of the shareholders don't speak English
Yes, and you put these frures down now sa 80 abellas worth which he submitted wés a egent for the plaintiffs. He thought the on- pany at great disadvantage and pores boy who for the most part, are agreed upon the go to go to Mr. Pitman and preas for money. In condition, and he asked me to help him. I told burdon
Boy advocated in this and my previous letter, June, 1886, the wult of the regotiations was him of the inferiority of the shells and said 1 8722,60 for the purpose of bringing sight the very reasonable rate. If these 400 shalls were tract was one of sale, never one of genes. He
first the obeyes at 700.
up his point of their not being up to sample, what the delivery, and that, plaintiffs were perfectly The extent of the Company's indebtedness, as and who so far izem being convinced by the that Mr. Pitman said he world pay $2,000, and would do nothing. He ente five or six times amount you dranged Yes, but I estimated at ready for delivery, and defendant had now given thought there had been no reasonable delay in These charges are not a result of a oslonis reason on Got's earth was there why he should justifist in making no more beyond the 495, and assamed by you, is much in excess of what it gaments addsend in your letter now under re the shells were to be sent to Messrs. Hughes and urged me to do what I could as they were really is. Our position.to-day is as follows" ply, still ossider that their wishes are rearongedowns at Bowrington. Mr. Pitman said this not marketeble goods I had large transactions
ment by book or by orook, they consented, as the Overdraft at Bank,...8675,000.00
abla and in the true interests of the Desk Com to Wong Kwong, my foki. The $2.000 race to with Chuu Ya Pai, and I said I would endeavour tion made at the time? No, but at the time I not have said to the plaintife" Bond me the 400 refusing to deliver these until they got paid.
foodant admitted having been asked for money $190,000,00
pang, whose interest are identical with their own be ou account. I got the 82,000. Chan Yu Fait to get an advance in the shells from the Bong roughly calculated that the expenses would shells at once.. Im in a hurry for them." De Afterwards fizding they could not get fall pay. -8895,000.00 | And with those of the Directors.-I am, Dear Sir, handed the money to rse and I gave him a rekong and Shanghai Batik, and if they would amount to about $700,
You did not calculate at the time that they by the plaintiffs and he submitted that the only boat thing to do, to take $2,000 on account. yours truly,
ceipt. I had given him authority to recuire this allow their shells to go to Foochow along with JNO. D. HUMPHREYS money for mo. Choa Yu Esi dedacted $125 mics I would treat them in the same way as my would amount to $725 80 F: You hare bot carried delay there was was sued by defendant not being That was his (bis Lordship's) idea and this
from this amount as balance due to him.
own, that if I could get the Foucher autho-thoigureel yourhrad eversings No. my lord. able to pay for the shells and take delivery, was bore out by the receipt which Chan
Now will you try and releet whether this it was quite abremsble to suppose in a large Fai gave to Mr. Pitanon which was Cross-examined-In the beginning at Jane ritine to pay full-price for them they would 1886, our fum owed Chan Ya Fai between beneft by it, and they weald receive their share sum of $2,600 was not the sam you agreed to contract like this, for 1,90 shells amounting to follows: Received of John Pitman the sum $1,000 and $2,000. He had not a bill of sale on of the advance. I gave the letter of the 28th give them --I did agree to advare them $2.000. over 311.000, pisintida could carry out the con of $2,000 for the Hip Tai Loong on amount Then you did mention the sum of $2,000 2-tract without some igreement as to payment brof shelle" He thought there, could be no or placo. There was no mortgage. I did not, to Chao Ya Fal the satue day and I left.
Canton, the same night. The Yer, to Chen Yu Fai Ho knew I was going to instalment. Defendant had nomitted that in his doubt that at the time that delivery was give his full authority to settle with Mr. Pit for the
contract with the Chiness authorities these made, it was made in pursuance of a contract of man any way he could. The only reason why eat payment was n xile through Mr. Lery the advance $2,000 on the shelle thus leaying $335,000.00, but this does not fa. Jao. D. Humphreys, Esq.
Then you did not tell him that you would give shells should have been delivered by February, ale dust under any other contract whatever. clade amount dao to Admiralty, which, as you DBAN EX-I have to acknowledge receipt of Mr. Pitman delayed taking the hell was next day. (Letter to Bank requesting advance! know, is repaid in periodical instalments. your letter dated the 8th instant which was duly because he had not the money ready. I got no u 694 shells to be paid to Bir. Lesy read:) A him a roporiouate amount of what you got on 1885, and that be was behlad with his outmet, the sentret had been carried not as the part of With regard to the new Dock, the Directors placed before my Directors at the Roard Meet. latter from We Fitmen complaining about the rucs of 83,800 was obtained from, the Bank on all the abelly-I told him I would do what I and is now tried to make out that plaintiffs the plaintiffs, and they were entitled to be paid hope that in the future it will add considerably ings held on the 16th instant, and to day diell Soms aue ild me that the $2,000 wern that 694 shells, of which 496 are Hip Tai could in Foodhon, and that he should enjoy the were to blame for the delay. So little did the for those ebells when they were ready to deliver. to the revenne; but so far from its having been In reply I am instructed to inform you that got by Mr. Pitman from the bank on depositing Loung's, and they received $2,000. I ultimately some advantages as regards his shells as I did defendant want these shells that he allowed this them. They, had received $2,000 and they went
delivered 1,895 hela in October, 1887. The for my own. fully occupied daring the 18 months since it was the Directors, having carefully weighed and con- the shells.
Did you expect to get the whole 1,900 shells opened only four vessels have been played in it.sidered all the points you args in favour of in Chan Yn Fail sm a douler in metals. My cause of the delay was the objection of the Foo
The Diretore request ate to say that they creading the capital, are aft of opinion from firm neue is Ping Koo. Fok Bal naked me in show authorities to the inferiority and on the from the pleatiffs F-Yes, my lov
Without advancing any money to them on so Bate no desire whatever to not in any way at their experiepos of the business that such increas. February, 185, to go and ank Mr. Pitman for grennd of the original delay. The table with fagonistic to the wishes of the shareholders, and ing of capital is unnecessary, and would be des money on koonnt of shells. Mr. Pitzoan Franõu wis over in August 1885. They were sunt Ya, my lord
New Dock.
Hongkong and Wham pos Duck the people who ought to find it, namely, its owe told me be had a contract from the Chinese into the contract I spoke with the managing night Yes, my account I asked for last proper and reascuable time.
and against this we bare
to place
contract
Balance of Filipinas"
...$ 40,000.00
Price of Fame...............50,000.0%
Outstanding seconuts, 180,000.00.
Aragon's repairs, 90,000.00
– $390,000,00
THE SHOKETARY TO MR. JNO. D. HUM-
PHLEXAN Hongbing and Whampoa Deck Co., Ltd. Hongkong, 26th July, 1889.
nontract to remain admished for over 1 montha entitled to recover the balance. The anter and they were not disposed of fill the month of claim had boos raised on an agreement whio be October, 1987, when no doubt greatly to the didid not think ever existed, and must therefore gust of the defendant, he coull valy obtain a prios fall to the ground. Judgment would be for the of 85.10 par haldi Then there was the plaintiffs for $2;123.25 mail voste