The Daily Press.
HONGKONG, NOVEMBER 30TH, 1880.
SUPREME COURT,
29th November.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE THE FULL COURT.
KO LEONG YUEN AND OTHERS V. BAN HAP AND OTHERS.
The Attorney-General (Hon. E. L. O'Malley) and Mr. Francis, instructed by Messrs. Brereton and Wotton, appeared for the plaintiffs; Mr. Hayllar, Q.C., and the Hon. Ng Choy, instructed by Messrs. Sharp, Toller, and Johnson, appeared for Ban Hap and four other defendants; and Mr. McKean, instructed by Messrs. Stephens and Holmes, appeared for the remaining four defendants. Mr. Hayllar continued his opening speech for the defendants and referred to the minute book of the company as showing that the plaintiffs had taken their part in the management of the company and that nothing had been done behind their backs. Among other minutes read was the following, dated 2nd March, 1879—“As to the bidding for the opium licence in British Hongkong, it was known that the foreigner Pitman was a very good friend of the Governor. Now, having through him obtained the opium licence (or company), it is proposed to pay a bonus (or premium) to him. Now, we have agreed with Pitman and settled with him that the bonus or premium for the three years should be $15,000, which we intend to pay him in one lump sum. The various gentlemen are hereby informed of this so that they may decide and sign their names as proof.” This was signed by the directors. Having concluded his address, Mr. Hayllar proceeded to call evidence.
Mr. Tan King Sing said—I am one of the defendants and a merchant, living at No. 16, Bonham-strand West. I came from Saigon with Ban Hap's power of attorney. I was ordered to tender, and did so on the 17th January, 1879. Pitman wrote out the tender. Mr. Ban Hap was then in Saigon. I did not dream of an opposition when I tendered. Having got it I became one of the Man Wo Fung. I wired Ban Hap and he came. After he came the Man Wo Fung was got up. Ban Hap got it up. I took thirty shares. I represent four others. I am a Fokienese born at Singapore. I do not speak Cantonese, but communicate with my co-directors through interpreters. The directors were Ban Hop, Cheong Hong Lim by his attorney Chow Yu Moon, Mok Sa Yeong, Ng Mun Kwan, Tam Yak Shan, the plaintiffs Ko Leong Yuen and Lai Tai U, and Chow Yu Moon. He was the treasurer. Ban Hap was the chief president and looked over everything when he came. He kept the register. Choong Hong Lim's attorney looked after local consumption. The two plaintiffs examined the opium for exportation. We made at once a first call of $250. The second call of $250 was then made, but very late. The third call was made, of $100, at the end of the eleventh moon. The four plaintiffs have not paid $900. The whole directors had the management. It was not successful. The accounts have been made up. The losses for the first year were more than $150,000. The old farmers had boiled more than they consumed the last few months and flooded the markets. The opium passed through this harbour from Shanghai, prepared at Macao. The old farmers went to Macao when we got the licence. They boiled there and competed with us. We were promised by Pitman that the Government would stop the loss. It did not stop it, and caused the loss. The opposition at Macao was the San Yee, composed of the Chap Sing and Yau Wo. We were carrying on business against great opposition. We found out losses in the eighth or ninth moon. These were losses on exportation. Our opium was not in demand so much as San Yee's. The two plaintiffs came to us and said we must return the monopoly to the Government or not to pay the monthly fee. They were willing to have the $10,000 forfeited and they abandoned their directorship. This was the middle of October, 1879. Ban Hap himself was then at Amoy. On the 6th or 7th of the ninth moon (21st October) Ng Mun Kwan wired Ban Hap. He came a few days after. The first two plaintiffs came to him. There were several there. Tam Yuk Shan said we must return the monopoly. Ban Hap said—“We shall lose the $50,000.” He said, "Never mind, we shall be losing more if we continue." Ban Hap said the licence was in his name and he would go on until the end of the term as best he could. The exhibit I is the register of shareholders in the Man Wo Fung. Tam Yuk Shan holds no shares in that name, but as Tse Yae Tong. Ko Leong Yuen has sold no shares; he is there as Sun Yoo Fong. When the plaintiffs met Ban Hap and saw that he did not yield, Tam Yuk Shan sold some of his shares. He sold eleven shares on 21st November. Ban Hap sent to enquire as to what he had heard about the Yan Wo and Chap Sing quarrelling. They were selling shares on the eighth day of the 10th moon and Ban Hap made enquiries. Shok Shong Chan was the negotiator. We had a meeting on the 5th February, 1880. Ban Hap called the meeting of those who wished for an amalgamation. Over twenty attended. It was held at No. 16, Bonham-strand West. The resolution was reduced into writing by the accountant Lau Ka Wan. I produce the minute book of the old company. All the shareholders present signed the draft agreement produced. There are twenty who signed. It was discussed and everyone had their say. It was all agreed and they signed it. After the meeting Ban Hap kept the agreement at the office. A few days after it was written Ko Leong Yuen and Lai Tai U went into the office where Ban Hap, I, and Ng Man Kwan were sitting, and asked for the document to copy. Ban Hap got up, opened his box, got it and gave it to Ko Leong Yuen. The latter handed it over to Lai Tai U and they both went away.
The agreement never came back. Wong Yeak Ho was sent for it by Ban Hap. It was taken away before the agreement of 9th March was drawn up, and we did not know how to set about drawing it up; we had to do it from memory. Dissent was expressed before the agreement of the 9th March. The two plaintiffs objected. They said this was wrong and that was wrong, but did not show any particular thing to be altered. Between 23rd February and 9th March there was further negotiation with the Yan Wo, by Shok Shing Chan. So far as I know there are no other shareholders unfavourable to the amalgamation but the plaintiffs. Since the amalgamation the company has prospered greatly and made profits. The profits for eight months are $32,000. Since the amalgamation the price of selling has been reduced from $70 to $50 from the last March. We made a yearly statement of accounts at the end of the first working year. They were distributed and sent by the accountant to the plaintiffs. I never heard of any objection to those accounts before the 23rd August. Tam Yuk Shan brought me the minute book with a minute in it regarding the Man Wo Fung and asked me to sign it. It is dated 7th June. He must have got it from the accountant. Since the 1st March, 1880, the two plaintiffs have come to the office. Ko Leong Yuen comes now nearly every day to see his friends and get information. No one has ever prevented the plaintiffs taking part in the management of the company. They do business with the Man Wo Fung. They buy opium for exportation. During the last few months of 1879 we borrowed money to pay the license fee. Altogether $65,000 was borrowed.
This closed the witness's examination-in-chief and the further hearing was adjourned until this morning.
Page 585