!
238
J
I am prinister
(no losed)
to his partnership with Chou Tung Sang, i took the opportunity to forward to the viceroy the duplicate copy of the Mortgage in my
office bearing endorsements of registration made on ebruary 11th.,
1905, in the handwriting of myself and Mr. Giles, the former Vice-
-Consul. This I did especially with a view to satisfying the
Viceroy of the genuineness of the Mortgage transaction so far as
the Bank was concerned. The Viceroy has never contested the
genuineness of this Mortgage; but charges "ung ha Chun of coliu-
-sion with Chou Tung Sang in order to protect the intter's pro-
-perty from confiscation by the Chinese Government. Against this
latter i would remark, as I have already pointed out, that the
Worteage transaction took place sone nine months before the vice-
-roy took any steps against Chou Tung Sang.
The Viceroy further alleges that ung ħa
Chun was merely an agent or nominee of Chou Tung bang, and that
the coal in question actually belonged to Chou Tung Sang a claim
which he based on the evidence of Chou fung Sang's book-keeper,
who is a prisoner in the Magistrate's Yaken.
in answer to Hung's statement of accounts,
the Viceroy denies their accuracy; and deciares that so far from
the partnership having been terminated on 31st. December, 1904,
as rung allezes, certain books impounded when the coal was seized
show that in July, 1905, rung Wa Chun, instead of being the owner
of the coal, was indebted to Chou Tung Sang in the sum of soms
$70,000 odd.
In respect to this question of partnership
between Chou and Hung, 1 had, in my early representations to the
Viceroy, claimed that whether the coal belonged to Chou or hung,
the bank's position as Mortgagee was in regular order, and that
the bank was entitled to hold the coal pending liquidation of its
advances. The bank on its part has complied with all formalities
in respect to the registration in this Consulate-General of the
Mortgage