September 3rd, 1921.]
In giving judgment, His Lordship said | the only legal defence raised by the defen- dants was that the contract entered into was not an enforcible contract. On that and he point he had heard evidence found that the agreement for a lease between the parties was sufficient and valid. The defence therefore failed, and judgment was entered for the plaintiff with costs, the order for possession to be suspended for one month.
DWELLING OR GODOWN ?
A claim to recover possession of the ground floor of premises situated in, Pottinger Street, and at present occupied by the Cheung Hing firm, was heard be- fore the Puisne Judge (Mr. J. R. Wood), in the Summary Court, on August 31st. The writ set out that the premises in question were used as a godown and not as a domestic tenement within the meaning of the Rents Ordinance.
For the plaintiff, Wong Tsai, Mr. F. E. Nash appeared; and the claim was oppos- ed on behalf of the defendants by Mr.
M. K. Lo.
The first floor of the same building is also occupied by the defendants and at the outset it was agreed that this por- tion of the premises was a domestic tene- ment within the meaning of the Ordin- ance. The issue was as to whether the two floors were let under a single ten- aney, or separately, and Mr. Nash under- took to call evidence to prove that the latter was the case.
#
In the witness box the plaintiff stated that the ground floor was let first at a rental of $60, and the first floor later at a rental of $40.
Mr. Lo, however, was able to produce rent receipts showing that both floors were let together at a rental of $80 and the Judge decided that the claim should be dismissed.
|
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT
EUROPEAN FINED FOR ASSAULT- ING AN INDIAN SERGEANT.
The hearing took place, before Mr. R. E. Lindsell, on August 27th, of the adjourned summonses against John Thompson, master mariner, staying at the Carlton Hotel, alleging disorderly conduct outside the Hongkong Hotel on the night of August 25th, and an assault upon an Indian police sergeant.
The defendant, who was represented by Mr. D. H, Blake (of Messrs. Wilkinson & Grist), cross-summoned the police ser- geant for assault and using abusive language.
Mr. T. H. King, the Deputy Super- intendent of Police, conducted the case for the prosecution.
Police Sergeant Nabi Bux, B246, said he had been 22 years in the force and was now on traffic duty. On August 25th, at 8.45 p.m., he was on general patrol duty near the Hongkong Hotel. The sergeant on duty there, L/S B135, asked him to stand by his post for a minute, and he did so. While there, he noticed a yellow chow bitch running under the Hongkong Hotel verandah. It was running after, and barking at peo- pla; he saw it do this four times. After wards it stood by two Europeans--the defendant and another. He went up to the two Europeans and said, in English
Please catch this dog; biting any pas- sengers. The answer he received was
Get away, you
black Mr. King: Who said that? The witness (pointing to the defen- dant): This gentleman.
16
J7
و
The witness went on
"}
to say that, in response to this, he said, again, in Eng lish, Please you not abuse me; you get this dog.' again, with bad language. For the second time he said, Why you abuse me, please?' Defendant said. "This is not my dog." Witness said "Not your dog,
The defendant abused him.
I catch this dog and go police station.' As he bent to catch the dog, and called it to him, he received a blow on his shoulders from the defendant. Witness was on the roadway at the time; the defendant came out from under the verandah and struck him. Defendant appeared to be about to strike another blow, but witness took hold of him and another constable came and also held him. Together, they took him to the police station. The dog followed, still barking and running at people. Defendant re- Judgment was given for the defendants sisted them most of the way to the station.
His Honour held that the two floors constituted a domestic tenement and that any claim for possession must therefore be brought under the Rents Ordinance. The present application had been made outside the provisions of the Ordinance and must therefore fail.
with costs.
MAGISTRACY.
THEFT AT THE DOCKS.
Mr. S. Williamson, Manager of Messrs. Moller & Company, was the complainant in a charge of stealing a cigarette case brought against a Chinese youth, at the Magistracy, on August 26th, before Mr. R. E. Lindsell. The defendant stated to be an apprentice fitter at Kow- loon Docks.
was
Mr. Williamson said that he was on board the Lindsay Moller, on August 25th, when she was being berthed for repairs at Kowloon Docks. He took off his coat and left it on the table outside the captain's cabin. He was absent for some time, and on his return was in- formed that the defendant was in police custody for theft. He missed his cigarette case and afterwards reported to Inspector Aris, of Hunghom Station, to that effect. Witness was then informed that the cigarette case had been found in the defendant's possession.
The defendant was sentenced to three months' detention at the Laichikok re- formatory.
The witness said he did not, at any time, use any other words to the defen- dant beyond what he had said, nor did he abuse him in Hindustani.
Mr. King: During this altercation did the other European say or do anything
at all?
Witness: No. he did not interfere. He took no part but came to the police station with us.
Before the defendant struck you that blow did you touch him at all?-No.
In cross-examination, the witness denied that he threatened to shoot the dog or that he used objectionable language to the defendant.
Mr. Blake I put it to you that you did, more
than once, and used other words such as swine.'
Witness: No, I do not abuse Chinese Should I use such language to an Eng- lish gentleman?
P.-c. B284 saw the beginning of the inci- dent. The Indian sergeant spoke to the Europeans and pointed to the dog. Then he saw the sergeant bend down to the dog and the defendant struck him a blow. The sergeant caught hold of his arm and witness went up and took hold of the other arm. They took him to the police station.
Cross-examined: He had met the defen- dant before. The latter accompanied him to the station, a few days ago, and accus- ed him of assaulting a coolie whom he had arrested.
238
Inspector Grant said that, on arrival at the police station, the defendant was very excited" but did not appear to be under the influence of drink. There was no indication that he had been
roughly handled by the police; his cloth- ing was not disarranged.
Mr. King: Did he make any remarks to the Indian sergeant in the charge.
room?
Witness: He called him several very filthy names, several times; I had to spec
to him about it.
Mr. King: Call a spade a spade at tell us what he said.
Inspector Grant repeated expresssions similar to those already given by the Indian Sergeant. Defendant also said that if he got a chance at the Indian sergeant, outside, he would kill him. He mentioned that he wanted to make a charge against the police sergeant but he did not specify it.
17 years.
Mr. Blake called the defendant. Defendant said he was a master mari- He ner, staying at the Carlton Hotel. had been on the China Coast for 16 or On Thursday evening, at 8.30 o'clock, when standing outside the Hong- kong Hotel, in Des Voeux Road, he noticed police station a few days previously. The an Indian policeman he had taken to the
and both of them came over and pointed. man pointed him out to a police sergeant and laughed. They hailed another Indian sergeant and all three stood near him and laughed. A dog belonging to the Carlton Hotel, which usually followed him, was attracted by a piece of steak carried on a He called string by a Chinese woman. the dog to his feet. The police sergeant said to him, Is that your damn dog?" and he replied, "No, get away from me; police sergeant then said he would shoot mind your own damn business."
*
The
the damn dog," and he rejoined "If you do, I will shoot your damn head off." Defendant added that he said that more as a joke than anything.
66
>>
Funny sort of joke,' commented th Magistrate.
The witness added that the police ser- geant used offensive language to him and lifted him off his feet and kicked him three or four times. He denied striking the policeman; he had more sense than to do that, though he had great provoca- tion. He admitted using bad language to the officer, after the latter had abused him. He had remonstrated with both police officers, before. for harsh treatment
of Chinese.
Cross-examined: The last ship he com- manded was the Chefoo; he had not com- manded a ship for 2 years; had been staying at the Carlton Hotel since April 26th; before that in England for two years. He could have had employment but would not accept the positions going. As a white man, he objected to being taken to the station by Indians; in India allowed to only European officers were arrest Europeans.
Alex. Livingston Woods, ship's mate, staying at the Carlton Hotel, said he was with the defendant at the time of the incident. He drew away some paces when the sergeant spoke, not wishing to be involved in the matter. He could not give the exact words used. The first bad language he heard was used by the ser- geant. Defendant did not strike the officer, he walked up to him to get a closer view of his number and the sergeant then scized him and shook him.
Mr. Blake, addressing the Magistrate, said that there was absence of motive on the defendant's part, but the police might have acted out of spite, on account of protests against their conduct made by the defendant.
The Magistrate: I find both charges against John Thompson proved. I fine him $15 on the first summons, and $25 on the second. I find the charges against the police sergeant not proved and dismiss them both.
Page 210Page 211