}
Chinese Authorities, and that he (the German Consul) was not in a position to interfere in it; that on the 20th February he waited on the Hun. U. C. Smith who promised to attend to the matter; that a petition was brought to bim signed by the members of the Tak-wo firm aetting forth that plaintiff had nothing to do with the transactions, but was only visiting his village when arrested. The Hon. C. C. Smith was shown this petition, and he sent a dispatch to the British Consal at Canton asking big to use bia influence in securing the release of the prisoner. The British Consul replied that as the matter was in the hands of the German Consul he could not interfere. Mr. Dennys then went to Canton and bad a long interview with the German Conant; and went and saw plaintiff, who was in a horribly dirty cell, with no bed, and was being trosted as a criminal.! Plaintiff then averred to Mr. Dennys that he had had no dealings with Messra. Vogel, Hage. dorn & Co, in his life, or with the Tak-wo shop, Mr. Hayllar then read the affidavits of Chan Shun, and Low Ahoi which contained distinct denials of plaintiff's having ever had anything to do with the shop, and also the affidavit of a clansman. Mr. Hayllar then said the first ques- tion was, had this Court jurisdiction to entertain the suit; and, secondly, if it had, was be entitled to an injunction at this stage. He contended for the affirmative of both propositions, and he would show their Lordships the leading cases bearing on the point. The first case which settled the point of jurisdiction was the case of the Halley, reported in 2 Privy Council cases, page 202. He then quoted a case of false im- prisonment in Naples-Scott v. Lord Seymour, 32 Law Journal, page 61. He also referred to the case of Mostyn v. Fabregas, the bead note of which stated that there appeared to be no reason why an alien should not Bue another alien in England for a tort com- mitted in a foreign country i it WAR shown that the wrong was actionable by the law of England as well as of the country where it bappened. He also referred to the case of the Earl of Oxford. There were many other authorities which be thought it unnecessary to go into at present, but their Lordships would Bee that there was no doubt about the right of aný alien to sue another alion,
The Chief Justice said they thought, as this was a very important case, that Mr. Hayllar had said enough to entitle him to the rule nisi. But then was plaintiff entitled to an injunction at this stage?
Mr. Hayllar said he would call the attention of their Lordships to the Code as to foreign laws. Foreign law in England bad to be proved as a fact, and the method of proving it bad always been by calling experts in that law. But the Code had altered all that and admitted' printed books containing the decisions with reference to law cases in foreign countries *8 evidence of the laws of these countries. What he now proposed to do, therefore, was to give in evidence the Peking Ganette, the highest aathority on such matters pablished in China. He had a translation of it, and he drew their Lordships' attention to a case of false impr)- sonment, where the party who had pat the other in prison was punished severely for it, 'They would see, therefore, that false imprison- ment for debt was not justice to men in China.
The Chief Justice said he thought they ought to allow plaintiff to come down here, each party giving ample security for the amount to be paid.,
Mr. Brereton (who happened to be in Court, and who is Mr. Vogel'a attorney) said he would consent to that arrangement on behalf of Mr. Vogel; but he did not know whether their con- senting would be sufficient for the prisoner's liberation.
The Chief-Justice said it was only at the in- stance of Mr. Vogel that the man was in prison in Canton.
Mr. Brereton said if Chun Shun would give security to Mr. Vogel for the amount olaimed against bim, defendant would give security for the amount claimed in the action. Then Mr. Vogel would withdraw the action brought at Cant, and do everything in bis power to have the man released. They were in no way responsible for his detention there,
The Chief Justice said be thought the better course would be to grant u rule wisi. He would say nothing as to who was right or wrong, but be suggested that both parties should give ample security to the Registrar that the party in the wrong would pay the full amount and
costs.
Mr. Hayllar said he would be satisfied with this arrangement,
The Chief Justice: We will, therefore, grant a rule nisi with liberty for the parties to make aneb arrangements as they think fit, and with a recommendation that they should do so. Dio you mean to say, Mr. Breretou, that the Ger- man Cossul at Cautou did not know that the man was to be put in prisou?
!
Mr. Brereton: Nothing whatever, as 1 am instructed.
The Chief Justice: What does the German Consul say in the affidavit? What was the answer be gave to the application for release P
Mr. Hayllar: Mr. Deanys in hie affidavit says that the German Consul promised distinct- ly that as soon as Chun Shun paid the money, the man would be released.
Mr. Brereton: We know only Chan Shua. It is on the responsibility of the Obinese authorities that the man was taken up, and not with our sanction or authority.
The Chief Justice: The responsibility resta with the German Consul ?
It was remarked that the German Consul said he bad no right to interfere in the matter. The Chief Justice: You know if the action is withdrawn that this Court has no power. But there is conduct of such a kind that Courts wont allow it to be pursued. Chief Justice Cockburn would not let a defendant even make a legal defence when he knew that morally be
was wrong.
Mr. Brereton said he was ready to show that his client was prepared to act with the utmost bona fides.
The Chief Justice: If Mr. Vogel continues that man in prison after what this Court bas said he will do so upon his responsibility as a mas. I think we had better adjourn this case till to-morrow to see whether the parties will agree.
Mr. Brereton said he had no doubt they should agree. He would recommend Mr. Vogel to do so.
The Chief Justice then said perhaps it would be better to adjourn till Thursday. But it affected the liberty of the subject.
Mr. Brereton said they could not have the affidavits from the German Consul on Thurs- day, perhaps it might stand over till Friduy.
The Chiet-Justice if that was so they would adjourn till Friday. That Court might be a fitting place for the German Consul, if he thought Et, to vindicate his conduct, and let the world see that be bad done right. He could do so if he liked, but was not ender any obliga. tion.
Mr. Justice Snowden said if an agreement was come to there would be no necessity for the German Consul'a affidavit.
Mr. Brereton said he had no doubt the agree went would be carried out, so far as his client was concerned,
Some conversation then took place as to the amount of security.
Mr. Hayllar said plaintiff claimed $10,000. The Chief-Justice said $10,000 was too much -be did not mean too much to claim but to much to give as security.
It was ultimately agreed that each party was to give security for $3,000, and the defondant in respect of the suit was to give $2,000 addi- tional. The case was adjourned till Friday,
594