114
the Chief Justice did not at that time call upon both of these Annamese Officers to produce the authority under which they professed to be empowered to carry on litigation for the King.
(4.1, Submission 2. and 3. The notice and order of March 6 1874 (Appendices A and B).
By this order the King is made to consent to the whole sum claimed $159,792 with interest at 12 per cent from the date of the writ, if he did not agree with hand upon a smaller amount within three months from the date of the order. This is indeed "a very remarkable order" seeing that it is made after ten day's argument as to the jurisdiction of the Court and before the Chief Justice had given his judgment.
It appears not to be borne upon his Honour's mind that Hoi Siu arrived on the 19th of March, refused to recognise the arrangement, and on the 14th of April in the witness box asserted that Ho-Man Chung had authority to settle the suit. It is much to be regretted that His Honour did not on this occasion require Ho-Man Chung to produce his authority.
As it was, Hoi Siu's statement was not denied or challenged and had sufficient weight at the time to induce the Chief Justice to make and the Counsel to consent to the order of 14th April (Appendix C). The order begins "A question having been raised whether the parties who represented the defendant in the Court were duly authorised by the King of Annam, both parties consenting, the Court does order that the foreign Attachment be renewed and the Gang be restored to the custody of the Court upon the foreign attachment as if the order of
115
180
the arrangement, and on the 14th of April in the witness box asserted that Ho-Man Chung had authority to settle the suit. It is much to be regretted that His Honour did not require Ho-Man Chung to produce his authority.
As it was, Hoi Siu's statement was not denied or challenged and had sufficient weight at the time to induce the Chief Justice to make and the Counsel to consent to the order of 14th April (Appendix C).
The rest of the text appears to be a continuation of the content on page 114 and is not properly connected to the initial part of the text on page 115. Reordering is not necessary here as the text is mostly a repetition with slight variations.
However, the correct order should be maintained as per the original document.