TAY
212
1:
Even if the Viceroy's statements were correct
he only claims that at the time of the mortgage Chou Tong Sheng
han a half interest in the coal (this interest the Viceroy sets
forth as Taeis 100,000 capital and laels 50,000 money advanced
whereas it is a fact that to conform to Western usage and for con-
-venience in making the coal contract with the Societe Francaise
des Carbonnage de Tonkin the capital for this cosi venture was
subscriced in Mexican dollars - $200,000 being the total) and ne
also states that Heng Hua Chun was Chou tune Sheng's Ageot
therefore follows that any mortgage made by Hene hua Chun (even if
he were a partner with Chou Tung Sheng) would be good, as the firm
of Yao bsiang could be bound by a mortgage made by one partner and
it is admitted by the Viceroy that Feng dua Chun was Choo Tung
Sheng's Agent and he could therefore make a valid mortgage either
as sole owner or as joint owner with Chou Tung Sheng.
It
Wurther if Chou Tung Sheng was a partner the
man in charge of the coal and who gave up possession to Messrs.
Shewan, Tomes and Company, would have done so on behalf of the Yao
Hsiang firm that is Yong Hua Chun and Chou Tung Sheng.
Feng Gua Chun must have executed the mort-
www
-gage sicher as sole owner - or on behalf of himself and Chou Tung
Sheng acting as Agent for Chou Yung Sheng a fact admitted by the
Viceroy in his despatch · but of course the bank maintain what they
oelieve and have always understood to be the case that Feng dua
Chun was at the time of the mortgage the sole owner of the coal.
A translation of the account determining the
arrangement between Heng Hua Chun and Chou Tung Chene is sent
nerewith in case further information is desired.
It might be remarked that besides the 40,000
tons of coal handed over to Messrs. Shewan, Tomes and Company and
mortgaged to the Bank there was other coal stored in the neighbour-
-hood of Canton not affected by the mortgage and over which we
naa