SIR,
No. 1194.
35, QUEEN'S Road, HONGKONG, 15th August, 1893.
SIR,
Re Logun.
I beg to inform you that I have been served by Mr. DENNYS with a bill of costs amounting to $465.25, and an appointment to tax the same at 2.15 P.M. today, so that it appears probable that the costs mentioned in my letter of the 11th instant, will be demanded from my client, Mr. LOGAN. I will deal with the bill of costs and the appointment to tax in any way that you may direct, as I submit with confidence that this is a matter with which my client has really nothing to do, the Government being the respondents.
COLONIAL SECRETARY'S OFFICE,
HONGKONG, 15th August, 1893.
In reply to your letters of the 11th and 15th instant, I am directed to inform you that His Excellency the Governor declines to admit any responsibility in the matter of the costs in the recent appeal case to which you refer.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your most obedient Servant,
G. T. M. O'BRIEN,
Colonial Secretary.
The Honourable
G. T. M. O'BRIEN, C.M.G.,
Colonial Secretary.
SIR,
Re Logan.
HONGKONG, 15th August, 1893.
In continuation of letters of the 11th instant and of this day's date, I beg to inform you that having received no answer to those letters, I deemed it best, in the interest of the concerned, to attend the taxation this afternoon under protest, and I accordingly did so. Before the taxation proceeded I handed in a protest in the following terms, viz.:
"On behalf of Mr. J. H. LOGAN, I protest against this taxation and proceed with it under protest on the ground that Mr. LOGAN was no party to this appeal and that the real respondent was the Crown.
"Hongkong 15th August, 1893.
"V. H. DEACON,
"Solicitor for Mr. Logan."
The taxation then proceeded, and in the result the bill was reduced from $465.25 to $254.75.
I beg to acquaint you with the result, and as it is evident that the other side mean to press for payment, I beg to repeat my request that the Crown, the real respondent, will accept the responsibility of these costs. Mr. LOGAN cannot pay them, and if they are pressed against him he will have no alternative but to go to gaol for a matter which in no way concerns him.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your most obedient Servant,
VICTOR H. DEACON.
No. 27M.
MAGISTRACY, HONGKONG,
24th October, 1893.
I am directed to inform you that the Acting Police Magistrate having received a certificate from the Registrar of the Supreme Court that the costs in the late appeal case-
Lam Yik and Lam Su vs. James Henry Logan
have not yet been paid, has been applied to by the Solicitor of the said LAM YIK and LAM SU to issue a distress against you under Section 112 of Ordinance 10 of 1890.
The Magistrate will take the application into consideration at 11 A.M. on Thursday next, the 26th instant, and requests your attendance at that time if you wish to show cause why the said distress should not issue against you.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your most obedient Servant,
W. M. B. ARTHUR,
Magistrates Clerk.
J. H. LOGAN, Esq.
Mr. LOGAN attended at the Magistracy on the 26th October, and handed the Magistrate the following Protest:
GENTLEMEN,
HONGKONG, 26th October, 1893.
Referring to the application mentioned in Mr. W. M. B. ARTHUR'S letter to me dated the 24th instant, being an application to the Acting Police Magistrate by the Solicitor of LAM YIK and LAM SU for the issue of a distress against me under Section 112 of Ordinance 10 of 1890, I hereby enter a protest against any such proceedings on the grounds (amongst others) that in the late appeal case mentioned in Mr. ARTHUR'S said letter, I was not the real Respondent, as the said LAM YIK and LAM SU must well have known, that the real Respondent was the Crown, as evidenced by the Attorney General being instructed or engaged in the case by the Crown, that after the case was decided in the Police Court, I never had possession or control of the Opium which had been seized, and that consequently I could not have given it up to LAM YIK and LAM SU however much I might have wished to do so in order to stop the appeal proceedings, and that the Government retained possession of the Opium in question and declined to come to any decision regarding its disposal until after the above-mentioned appeal had been determined.
Page 538
SIR,
[ ]
No. 1194.
35, QUEEN'S Road, HONGKONG, 15th August, 1893.
SIR,
Re Logun.
I beg to inform you that I have been served by Mr. DENNYS with a bill of costs amounting to $465.25, and an appointment to tax the same at 2.15 P.M. to- day, so that it appears probable that the costs mentioned in my letter of the 11th instant, will be demanded from my client, Mr. LOGAN. I will deal with the bill of costs and the appointment to tax in any way that you may direct, as I submit with confidence that this is a matter with which my client has really nothing to do, the Government being the respondents.
[ i ]
COLONIAL SECRETARY'S OFFICE,
HONGKONG, 15th August, 1893.
In reply to your letters of the 11th and 15th instant, I am directed to inform you that is Excellency the Governor declines to admit any responsibility in the matter of the costs in the recent appeal case to which refer.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
you
Your most obedient Servant,
VICTOR H. DEacos, Esq., &C.,
&c.,
$0.
G. T. M. O'BRIEN,
Colonial Secretary.
The Honourable
G. T. M. O'BRIEN, C.M.G.,
SIR,
Colonial Secretary.
my
I am, Sir,
Your most obedient Servant,
No. 27M.
VICTOR H. DEACON.
SIR,
Re Logan.
HONGKONG, 15th August, 1893.
In continuation of letters of the 11th instant and of this day's date, I beg to inform you that having received no answer to those letters, I decined it best, in the interest of the concerned, to attend the taxation this afternoon under protest, and I accordingly did so. Before the taxation proceeded I handed in a protest in the following terms, viz. :---
"On behalf of Mr. J. H. LOGAN, I protest against this taxation and pro- "ceed with it under protest on the ground that Mr. LOGAN was no "party to this appeal and that the real respondent was the Crown.
"Hongkong 15th August, 1893.
"V. H. DEACON, "Solicitor for Mr. Logan."
The taxation then proceeded, and in the result the bill was reduced from $455.25 to $254.75.
I beg to acquaint you with the result, and as it is evident that the other side mean to press for payment, I beg to repeat my request that the Crown, the real Mr. LOGAN cannot pay respondent will accept the responsibility of these costs. them, and if they are pressed against him he will have no alternative but to go to gaol for a matter which in no way concerns him.
I have the honour to be,
The Honourable G. T. M. O'BRIEN, C.M.G.,
Sir,
Your most obe-lient Servant,
Colonial Secretary.
VICTOR H. DEACON.
MAGISTRACY, HONGKONG,
24th October, 1893.
I am directed to inform you that the Acting Police Magistrate having received a certificate from the Registrar of the Supreme Court that the costs in the late appeal case-
Lam Yik and Lam Su vs. James Henry Logan
have not yet been paid, has been applied to by the Solicitor of the said LAM YIK and LAM SU to issue a distress against you under Section 112 of Ordinance 10 of 1890.
The Magistrate will take the application into consideration at 11 A.M. on Thursday next, the 26th instant, and requests your attendance at that time if you wish to show cause why the said distress should not issue against you.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your most obedient Servant,
W. M. B. ARTHUR, Magistrates Clerk.
J. H. LOGAN, Esq.
Mr. LoGaN attended at the Magistracy on the 26th October, and handed the Magistrate the following Protest :---
GENTLEMEN,
HONGKONG, 26th October, 1893.
Referring to the application mentioned in Mr. W. M. B. ARTHUR'S letter to me dated the 24th instant, being an application to the Acting Police Magistrate by the Solicitor of LAM YIK and LAM SU for the issue of a distress against me under Section 112 of Ordinance 10 of 1890, I hereby enter a protest against any such proceedings on the grounds (amongst others) that in the late appeal case mentioned in Mr. ARTHUR'S said letter, I was not the real Respondent, as the said LAM YIK and LAM Sc must well have known, that the real Respondent was the Crown, as evidenced by the Attorney General being instructed or engaged in the case by the Crown, that after the case was decided in the Police Court, I never had possession or control of the Opium which had been seizol, aud that consequently I could not have given it up to LAM YIK and LAM Su however much I might have wished to do so in order to stop the appeal proceedings, and that the Govern ment retained possession of the Opium in question and declined to come to any decision regarding its disposal until after the above mentioned appeal had been determined.
538
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.