1924-10-25 — Page 13

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1924.

CORRESPONDENCE.

CHINESE CLUB SWEEF.

- To the Editor of the China Mail.]

Sir--I have read with much interest the letter of Mr. Fung Man-, the Hon. Secretary of the Chinese Club, written in reply to my letter of the 10th instant.

1023, whieli evidence" "Yung chai who was not enllod, at the Arbitration absolutely denied in the libel action recoñtly heard in the Court here,

THE CHINA MAIL

Notwithstanding this new evi dence and the verdict of the Special Jury the Committee of the Club as recently as last Saturday held an extraordinary general meeting of the Club and passed a

This

The whole of this evidence wus

We now come to matters subse- rejected by the arbitrators for the quent to the Award. On the 7th solarenson, according to the July 1923 my arm wrote a letter Award, "that the Assistant Clerk of to Messrs. Lo & Lo referring to the Chinese Clubs on that afternoon the conditions nrade by the Club with now Chile Buurtban and Yuen to Mr. Ng's residence and was act according to the Award of the resolution authorising the Com-

It now transpires that of these between 3.90 and 4.00 telephoned that the Club wil; not be bound to

Bling-dah wore bribed. Evidence answered in a lady's voice (Indy arbitrators and to the Award and mittee to hold an inquiry into the was obtained in Shanghai on com- unknown and unidentified by the asking that the Committee will allegation made by Chik against mission and read at the hearing of witness or by any one) to the effect retain the prize moneys in their Mr. Ng Quinn, viz. that he obtain. the libel action which clearly proved that the family did not know who hands pending an inquiry by themed the ticket by a trick. this. The Promissory Note taking was the purchneer of the ticket into the Award and pending the over Chik Yui-chan a liability to No. 08066 and that Mr. Ng was hearing of the libel action. The only object of Mr. Fung the General Exchange Co., Ltd. in Shanghai with the counterfoils." On the 9th July my firm' made Man-sui's letter is to attempt to which formed the bribe), was prI should like to publish the whole a similar application to the Club justify the conduct of the Club induced and a cheque signed Lound of the Award on this point belt it itself. refising to pay to the person wito Lo for $4.100 payable to Yuen is far too lengthy. But if any of

To neither of these letters did has now been proved by a Court of Shing-dah was also produced (the your readers turn up either of the my firm receive a reply, Taw to have been the folder of the intter with 12 other choques all morning papers on the 7th day of waning ticket the value of the first signed. "Lo and ho and all paid July, 1923, they can read the whole prize.

out of the proceeds of the first Award.

ands.

་

His

That

resolution can have only one object, namely, to again expel Mr. Ng Quinn from the Club, for this reason that as he had already been reinstated by the judgment of the Court no further step by the Club for this purpose was necessary. On the 21st July my firm again The resolution can therefore have wrote to the Hon. Secretary to the the one and only object-the Club pointing out that the lost intended expulsion of Mr. Ng He famuded his arguments on the prized by the Hongkong and Shang- Now as to the evidence that Chik winning ticket, may be found. Quinn, furt, that there is no legal or moral hai. Bunking Corporation though | purchased ticket No. 03086. having regard to the circum- Under the above circumstances Hality on the Club to pay. That the production WHE protested evidence was that he purchased it stances under which it was lost it seems clear to me that the Club ther is to legal liability I admit against by Mr. M. K. Lo, who on the 5th January, 1023, in the and drawing the Secretary's atten- are under a moral obligation to Had there been, the Club would have actually paid the cheque to Yuen private room and presence of La tion to Clause 4 of the Sweep Con- pay the prize money over to Mrs. heen a long ago

But as to Shing-dah,me of the bribed witYung-chmi, and Chik Yau-cou and ditions providing, for payment Chan, unless they are now pre- there being no toral tibility T juin neaves, and took a receipt from Yuen Shing-dab, the two latter the only on substantial security being pared to say in public print in igsie. The inbility to pay is and kim. This recipt was also proĮbribed, witnesses. Li Yung-chai

only be--for technical reasons duced. It was further proved that was not called at the arbitration bit given, and suggesting that should answer to this letter that they still

they pay Chik,

substantial assert that Mrs. Chan, Mr. Ng sir une perfectly well-known to the Yen Shingalah had refused to evidence was obtained in the security for repayment should be Quinn and the witnesser called on Club's Solicitor moral The rightful owner of the winning unless he was paid-cush $1,000 lat (cally Tai Chik ever purchased wards produced. This letter was themselves in the Arbitration pro- one.give evidence the Arbitrationibel-nction and he denied emphati given in case the ticket is after behalf of Mrs. Chan (twenty in all-myself included) perjured ticket is therefore to repent the he nccepted Saff ens and a pro ticket in his private on in his also ignored. concluding words of my original | mise of a further sum should the presence, Now us to the date

With regard to the statement ceedings and that the evidence Tester "dependent entirely on the award be in Chile Song-ling's favour 5th January, 1923. He (Chik) that in view of the finding of the given by Mr. Ng Quinn and his „bonour of the Members of the Com- and nothing if against bio. The said it was on the same date that arbitrators the indemnity was witnesses in the Libel Action was mittee of the Cidnese Club,” amount paid to him out of the pro- paid me n-bill of costs for defend-only taken ex abundants cautela also perjured.

Mr. Pung Mansai refers at ceeds of the sweep prize was $4,100 ing him at The Police Court. The would point out that by the con- length to the Arbitration to which though he signed a receipt for date he paid me the question of the ownership of $4,900 The money actually paid Jamary, 1923, and produced at is required even if the loss of the selves is that they must either (1) The position in which the Com- was the 1th ditions on the ticket an indemnitymmittee of the Club now find them- The winsing ticket was referred by to this witness was $4,600. It wasr Arbitration the counterfoil re-ticket is reported before the assert the above witnesses com- agreement between the two claim-also proved at the hearing of the ceipt for the money paid my firm, drawing, that in my firm's letter mitted perjury or (2) admit that II. quotes from a letter fiel action that this witness was my bill book, and had ready to pro- of the 21st July 1923 the Club was the Club is under a moral obliga- written on 2961 March, 1921, by not an important official at the the my journal. I also produced The Club's Solicitors to the resper Bank as he had alleged, hut, a ser letter of the same date sent me security before paying the money Mrs. Chan after having paid the Asked to obtain substantial tion-to-pay the prize money to live Soliditurs for this claimintsvant to fai Yang-chai, the Marager by Chik and gave evidence that to Chik Sung-ling and that the Club only agfeed to such of the Bank in Shanghai. This luk himself elled at my office on

the same to Chik Sung-ling in such a arbitration on the editions ;-- saine Yuen Shing-dala is now the that date with the letter and possibility of the missing ticket manner that no return, of the That the Club will not he proprietor of his own shop in [money, In dealing with this the that in the South China Morning position would never have arisen

being found was pointed out, and moneys can be enforced. hound in se neverting to the Slanghai purchases of his arbitrators say in the Award: Post" of the 24th July 1923 a if the Club had complied with con- Forine. This also wis payed in the think thut, Mr. Brutton was mi notice appeared to the effect that dition 4 endorsed on the sweep award.of the arbitrators, That the Chih reserves all its

libel metion.

Taken in thinking that the man, who Esidence was given by Mag brought the $100 to him in pay the Club proposed to pay the ticket and with the request con- rights and that the position} of the Club in fair shall be Chan and Tepey Wii, fore thement of this costs in respect of a money to Chik Sung-ling upon a tained in my firm's letter of the dvemed so be exactly, the Parbitrators that a telegram was

Police Court case, together with an guarantor being obtained to guar-21st July 1923 and obtained an

adequate guarantee before pay sabe as if no such gridta-sent by Henry Wei at the requestcompanying letter was the Plain-entee the recipient. tim had taken places,"

Under the above circumstances ment to Chik Sung-ling... of Mrs. Chan to Mr. Ng Quirinin

tilf (Chiki himself.** The Chaly obviously meant in the fernoon of the 1st March after taken his evidence for his defence, indemnity contemplated was a strongly that the Club is in honour Mistaken when I had personally it is clear that the guarantee or I again, assert and assert most main a free hand to pay whomsoever she know" hat she was the owner seen him on at least two occasions guarantee to replace the money if bound to pay the value of the first they liked independently of any of the winning ticket and that shein doing so and then again at the were subsequently discovered prize to Mrs. Chan.

bitration. This is farther exen cold not find it. The arbitrator Police Court and afterwards, all that Chik Sung-ling was not plified by the Club's letter at deal with this in the Award

It would be instructice, in the till Mach, 1923, in reply to an follows "We find as a fact that 411 January, 19237 On this point sane. There would be no ques-stated if you would publish in within a period from the 2nd to the morally entitled to receive the light of this letter and the facts apdication by Messrs. Lyon and this flogram was not sets off of purchase of the ticket two other tion of legal liability because nei-juxtaposition to this letter the Tie Solicitors for Chik Sung Mr. Henry Wei on the instructions witnesses were called to show that ther Mrs. Chan, Chik Sung-ling Award which appeared in the lives for an arbration by two of the Defendant (Mrs. Chan) the correct date was as Chik him-nor anyone else could possibly Press of this Colony on the 7th arbitrators and an ampire, part of the altercon of the 1st March, santed, the 4th January, 1923, have any legal claim against the July 1923. Every fact and state- whiria reads:The Club does not 1923. We find that the Defendant yet the imbitators say: "We see Club whether the ticket was lustment in this letter can be proved wish to take part in any controversy did not tell him to send of this reason it all to doubt the Plain or not lost your client may have with any per legum and did not tell him to tiff's (Chik' evidence that he did

by reference to the transcript of son as to the ownership of the wire to Mr. Ng at all. It is not for buy this ticket on the 5th January, the Club had declined to be bound taken at the Arbitration, to the It is here to be noticed that as the shorthand notes of evidence Hicket." It is only on being prussed | 05

to speculate regarding the 1928, in Mr. La Yung-chai's 'roon by the Award they cannot in Award, to the evidence taken in by my firm on behalf of Mrs. Clam molives which the sender. Tad in

at the office of the General honour now say, as they are the Libel Action, to the cheques by a better dated 21 March, 1923. sending this telegram: it may be Exchange."

attempting to do, that in view of paid out by Messrs. Lo & Lo, to that the Club's Solicitors reply, as as Mr. Alabaster suggested, that

In the Award the arbitrators the arbitrators' Andings the subse-the receipts, to the indemnity, and flows. We are instructed to the sender thought that a hintsell find "that the exact date on which went production of the ticket has other-letters-and-documents re- infien vorm the rat the read-u-pure-in-the-ticket---O8GG quest of the patios i prepared to this was denied by Henry Wilcket No. 03066 was in fact pur- no effect on the ownership thereof ferred to in this letter appasin sic embers of the Club it may be that the sender, knw chased seems to us to be a matter as between Mra: Chan and the as are willing and as the parties in that the ticket 03066 had of comparatively little import-Club. shall agron to set as arbiteriors tabern sold through Mr. Ng. assumedance." With this I beg to differ. inquire into the ownership of the int it was sold to a member of the The date upon which ticket No. ficked No. 6s as between the family." There was not per importance. For if purchased on 03066 was bought is of extreme twa present claimants

on the of evidence to support this siges the 24th December 1922 ns alleged terms and conditionis quoted above. tion,

In perggraphy 7 of his Better Mr. The telegram sent to Mr. Ng by Mrs. Chan and her witnesses Pung Man-sad states that it is true Quinn at Shurghi, c/o The Union and found by the Special Jury in that the 4'll should not, and Bank of China, informed him that the libel action (the evidence was would not, be bound by the Award, is family in Hongkong had won that all tickets in the book con- the indemnity as drawn fails Pinkettes in your bag, for travelling | but it would find here quotes the first prize in the sweep with taiming Nos. 03061 to 03070 were again from the above-mentioned ticket (B6 and to return in sold on or before the 24th Decem

In addition to this it is well to letter from the Chila Solicitora)mediately. But, evidence was ber 1922) Chik could not have note that the guarantee was no doubt sise the Award of the given before the Arbitrators by Mr. purchased the same ticket No. furnished by the Tabaqueria Arbitration is most weighty con-T. V. Soong, the Manager of that 03066 on the 4th or 5th January Filipina and that one of the sums Sitter wheat the Clubs cetines to Bank in Shanghai, that he did not 1923 and therefore Mr. Nr Quinn paid out of the prize money by consider the question of payment receive the cable till the 2nd March could not have obtained that ticket Messrs. Lo & LD, through the as from him on 2nd March 1923 in hands of Mr. M. K. Lo (who was after the Award las.been made," and did not give the rable

e poi tu dar as the decoded to Mr. Nr Quinn till after Shanghii. If he did not but-only the Solicitor-for-the Club Club 36 raspu fr differing 12 o'clock toon-on-2nd-March after ticket 03056-then what ticket did but for Chik Sung-ling and the from the conclusion arrived at by the interview with Chik ut which he buy?

The evidence given on Tabaqueria Filipina) was the sum the Arbitrators which, by agreeChik nd landed Mr. Ng Quim a this point by two witnesses called of $2,550 to Air. K. E. Tsao, the Shanghai. mert, was in fact to determine the ticket, which interview, according by Mrs. Chan was that Chik pur- then Manager of the Tabaqueria rival chians, the only honourable to Chik's own evidence in the chased 08076, a friend of Chik's a Filipina, for furnishing a worth- and possible attitude for the Chai to Arbitration, took place between Shanghai man, purchased 03077, less indemnity under which nei- fake or after the Award was to 150,xam. a) 12.10 p.m. the and one of the witnesses himself ther he

With regard to the called by Mrs. Chan purchased Filipina could under any possi

nor the Tabaqueria te day: exilence of Mr. T. V. Soong, the 08078 on the 4th January 1923.bility be liable. arbitrators dealt with it in this way. This evidence the arbitrators

Since the Award behind which

unite the payment to the elainant

as

The only proper course for the Club to have adopted on paying obtained a guarantee for the re- Chik Sung-ling was to have turn of the money if it should subsequently turn out that Mrs. Chan was morally entitled to pay- ment and this is the very thing to do."

Club, without holding any inquiry

by the Committee as called for by

the Club's rules, expelled Sydney

Yours faithfully;**

GEO. K.-HALL BRUTTON. Hongkong, October 24, 1924.

ARE YOU GOING ON A JOURNEY?

of

If so be sure and put a VE oftem, indores constipation, Ren-sickness or misces, and Pinkettes are helpful a aposentatives again t these is. Furthermorn that daily regalarity counteract the passible evil effects o

is entured by Pinkettes curge of diet or of olim ste

which

Ay a gunthe liver regulator and a penisur for sick headache, alious attacks, se nausen. Pinkettes are per cents the vin, Dr. Douxooled. Chemists se'l them,

illiaros Medicine co, 80 Kingsa Road,

TO-DAY'S ADVERTISEMENTS.

HAMBURG-AMERIKA LINJE.

THE Steamship

“SAARLAND"

hazardous Godowns of the HONG KONG & KOWLOON WHARF & GODOWNCO.LTD, whence, and/or from the Wharves, delivery can be obtained.

so found to be the true owner, and seer mugly the full amount of the prize money was paid to Mr. Chik We cannot believe that Mr. Ng entirely reject. The ticket handed the Club are still sheltering, the onar bent the 9th October, 1923. did not know of the contents of this to Ng Quinn in Shanghai was

But do the Cth new see no telegram before he went to inter-03076. reason for differing from the conclu view the Plaintiff (Chik Sung-ling)

That Chik and his nephew Chik sion arrived at by the Arbitrators' on the morning of the 2nd Mareli'

Yau Chau told a deliberate le at Ng Quinn from membership. An in the light of the following :-

and again

"In our opinion Mr the arbitration was clearly proved, action was brought against the having arrived, Consigates of Cargo On the 7th March, 1928, Mr. Ng also went to that interview with During the proceedings Chik pro Committee of the Club by him for by her are hereby notified that all Sydney Ng Quinn on the morning the pro-conceived intention o' after his return from Shaughti getting hold of the ticket 08066ed between himself and nephewment was stained by consent for into the hazardous and/or extra- duced 4 telegrama which had pass-his reinstatement, in which, judg-goods are being landed at the risk, notified the Hon. Secretary of the which he must have recollected or and in cross-examination both his reinstatements Club in writing dat Mr. Clan discovered as having been pur- was the owner of ticket No. 03066 chised, from Mr. Ng by the Plain stated that there were no other There has also been the libel telegrams and that the telegrams action before referred to tried by which was lost, and gave him the biff (Chik)." There was no evid- then before, the arbitrators were a Judge and a Special Jury, in names of each and every purchaser ence whatever to support the find. of a ticket in the hook Nos. 08061ing of the arbitrators that the the only telegrams which had which action Mr. Ng. Quinn took

No claims will be admitted after to 03070 and the number of the telegrain was received by Mr. Ng passed between them Subse upon himself the burden of proof. ticket each purchased.

Quin before the interview, quently the cable office, produced 4 The jury found for Mr. Ng Quinn the goods have left the Godowns, Bix witnesses stated an outh or At the hearing of the libel action other cables sent by the nephew and awarded hima: $40,000 and all goods remaining undelivered to Chik. On this falsehood the damages. In this action, in addi- after 31st October, 1924, will be affirmation that they saw the win there was the additional evidence Arbitrators after admitting that tion to the evidence given at the subject to rest, t ning ticket No. 000 sold to Mrs. of the inside chit book of the Union their evidence was false make this Arbitration, evidence of bribery All Claims must reach us by Chan on 21th December, 1929, at Bank of China in Shanghai which comment "The Plaintiff might was proved against two of Chik's 7th November 1924, or they will remaining tickets in the same book by that Bank on the 1st March but them for the obvious reason that evidence as to the finding of the

as the showed that no cable was recived have been reluctant to produce witnesses in the arbitration and not be recognised. ¡Nos. 03067-03070 were sold. The that two were received on the 2nd at least one of them contained ticket was also adduced. The Club

Arbitratori" snið (pura." 2' fel of Murch, Award) :-"'We are unblo 10 Evidence was also called at the gratuitous insults on a legal prae- will undoubtedly contend that this accept the evidence given as to the Arbitration to prove that on the Intitioner in the Colony. Absolutely Libel Action was ex parte and that mals and purchase of tickets Nos. March, 3923, the day of the race ignoring the fact that if Chik and no witnesses were called by Chik 03066 to 99070. We reject Bich Mrs Churi and her family find his nephew deliberately led in one Sung-ling. The only evidence he evidence as being untrue. On others, not mombers of the family, particular they could do, so in could have adduced would be the signed by what ground? Beenuse Chik knew that Mrs. Chan, was the another.

evidence called by him at the Sung-ling, Chik Yauchan, his owner of the winning ticket, one of In this letter I have not dealt | Arbitration. In the Libel Action, nephew, and Yuen Ahing-duh, who them being a Member of the Com- with the alleged Memorandum put it was proved that 2 of these wit- posed gaan important official in the mittes of the Chinese Cjob who was in by Chik in the Arbitration. Inesses, Chik Yau-Châu, and Yuen Bhanghai Branch of the Chins told by a member of the family ifall trust that in future correspon. Shing-dah, ware bribed and they Specio Bank though, hej, could afternoon that Mr., Chan, was the dence I'skall not be compelled to were the only witnesses who in “neither "reid nor write Chinese owner of the winning ticket) that deal with it. If I'am I can and addition to Chik Sung-ling gave accounts and was in receipt of only it was loft, and he waseed to shall do so in no uncertain manner. evidence as to the purchase by $19h month wagen, gave evidence report the fact to this Corinthof So much for the main points in him of 03066. the itness Yuen that the ticket was purchased in the the Club It must also be remem- the Award behind which the Com: Shing-dah in addition to the above ivate room of Li Yung-christ bored that the telegram hereins mittee of the Chinese Club now gave evidence that hesraw ticket the office of the General Exchange blóre referred to was despatched to shelter themselves which was No. 08036 handed by, Chik to Mr. ROAULTED, An Die lite, Tammel Mo No Quinn dem Pha

1024

the same time and place

examined by Messrs Goddard and All damaged packages will be

Louglas Marine Surveyors) au 10 am on the 30th October, 1924

No Fire Insurance will be effected. Bill of Lading will be counter

ARNHOLD & CO. LTD.

ents Hongkong, 25th October, 1924.

ROKOR

FIRESTONE GUM-DIPPED

CORDS AND STEAM WEL- DED TUBES

The Marketualy do deliver "MOST of Quality

MILES PER DOLLAR." Prie Elat on application

ROYAL ENFIELD MOTOR

CYCLES

Model 3508-3/4 BR

505 Model 1808, EL. P.M.

.8 785 Model 190 8 E. P. (Combination)...81 195

ESSEX (Built by Hudson) Six Cylinder

ESSEX Motor Cars,

MOTOR CARS

complete with Cowl Lampe Diso Whools: Five Cord Tyras and Tubes:

5-passenger Touring 5-passenger Coach

*

$2.375 *52,800

DODGE BROTHERS

MOTOR CARS.

Bo Universal is thus Car's reputation for long life, that exceptional mileage recorda no longer exelte aurprise.

$2.510

101-... $2.570

$3,200"

$3.646

141

$3.850

$3.875

STANDARD MODELS: Complete with lagneto Ignition, Are Dlso Whoir and fivo Com. Tyres: 3-passenger Roadster... S-passenger Touring ........... 3-passenger Chupe 5-passenger "B" Sedan ... -4-passenger Coupe 5-passenger "A

Sedan. SPECIAL MODELS: Complete with Magneto Ignition. Nickeled Radiator Stoll, Cowl Lights, Mickled Front and Rear Bumpers, Rear View Mirror, Automatin Wind Shield Wiper, Scuff Plates, Motometer and Lock, Special Blue Leather Upholstery, five Diso Wheels, and fire 6-ply BALLOON TYRES :

3.passenger Roadster...

5-passenger Touring ...

4-passenger Coupe

10 ***

5 passenger **A* ·Sedan ...

4Th

$2,750

car

$2,791

***

$4.116

$4,140

JEWETT SIX-50 (Paige-

built) De Luxe Touring

1

Cars.

Complete with Extra Cord Tyre and Tyrs' Cover; Trank Rack, Trank and Body Rails; Combination Stop and Tall Light; Double Bar Spring Bumper, Front and Hear; Motometer; Bids Lights on Cowl; All-Nickelod Head Lamps: Automatio Windshield -Wiper - Rear-View-Mixroer-Ban-Vivor Dis

Whools

$3,250 $4,42

De Luxe Sodan

*** ***

HUDSON SUPER SIX

HUDSON SUPER SIX

4 passenger Touring

MOTOR CARS,

complete with fal

Lampa Epare Cord Tyre and Tubes. Dio

Wheels; and · Nicikel Trimmings.

-12

414

$3,800

7-passenger Touring`...

***

$4,000

5-passenger Coach

$4,300

5-passenger Redan 7-passenger Sedan

$5,000

$5,530

PAIGE SIX-70 De Luxe

Model Touring Cars.

Completo with 8-day Clock) Dampers, Front and Roer; Motomelor Locked in, Eadiator Nickoled Radiator and Hoad Lamps; Automatio - Wind Ahield Wiper; Rear View Mirur; Spare Curd Tyre with Tubo sad. Cover;Folding-Luggage-Raok - Trunk Rade; Combination Stop and Tall Light;

Ban Visor; Tusro Diao Wheels, etc, De Laxe Brougham, '........ ... De Luxe Bedens...

***

$5,200 **$8,000 $6,800 $7,050

De Luxe Suburban Limousine.........

FEDERAL MOTOR TRUCK

CHASSES:

Capacity: Wheel Base:

Loading Space:

Price:

·I-ton

1167 $3,350

132 1-1/2-ton

145*

118 $4,300 145 2-1/2-ion

110" $6,400 2-1/2-ton 1571 -134" $6,400 2-1/2-toa 169

.158" $6,550 2-1/2-ton-161*

*131*** $6,800 2-1/2-ton 173 155* $6,950 3-1/2 to 4-ton. 1577 5-6-ton

-154 $9,500 Completo specifigatiha on request.

163

*154′′ $8,400

FEDERAL MOTOR BUS CHASSIS.

25-30 Passonger; 190-Inch wheel baso a $14 inches from dich_so"Year" of frame; special Scylinder. Kür Motor (&A.C. in ing 33.75 bp); », erislly low gear ratioz elatrie. lights, startar nad generator; 36 x 4 front Curd,dosi, 3 tear Files one Cibon Type 197: 480 Deck Complete apofiitis on sinest,

THE DRAGON MOTOR OʻK CO LTD.

Registered Head Often and Bert lce Station 33, Wong Nal Chun Road) Hayevda