10
questions, ou the answers to which the final decision must depend, for there are several groups of circumstances on which the question whether these men were partners in the Cheong Loong depends. But as the question involved in the motion is whether the verdict is against the weight of the evidence it is material as I review the evidence with regard to each branch of the case for me to express my views whether the verdict is against evidence on that part of the case: and I shall then be in a better position to answer the ultimate question on which the fate of this motion depends.
There is however in connexion with this part of Mok Kun's evidence a much more important question which throws much light on the truthfulness or otherwise of his story.
The importance of this evidence is that Mok Kun, if his story is to be believed, knew all along that these 3 men were partners in the Cheong Loong: it is not a case of an impression acquired subsequently, and re-enforced by random recollections of these festal gatherings; he tells us he knew at the time. He would have us believe that it influenced his conduct in the second, the "interviewing period"; but what he has not explained is that he did not breathe a word of this story to Mr. Schluter of Reuter, Brockelmann & Co. during the discussions he had with that gentleman preparatory to the letter of February 21st being written to the German Consul. This is a point I shall have to go into in greater detail in connexion with the answer to the 3rd question, but it must for the purpose of the present question be taken to be a fact that not only was nothing said as to this early knowledge or the grounds of it, but the first intimation to Mr. Schluter was that one of the 3 only, the "rich man of Canton" was the partner: and that the names of the other two were only introduced subsequently. The letter of 30th January was written by Mr. Schluter to the branch in Canton after consultation with Mok Kun; it refers expressly to Leung Lai Sang as the proprietor of the sugar shop, and only to him: he is also referred to as the owner of the Kwong Hing Cheong. It refers to him with special precision as the man whom Mok Kun had induced a few weeks previously to put up the $5,000 security; and the branch is requested to induce him to sign a paper binding himself to take delivery of the undelivered sugar and to pay the amount due. Is it conceivable if Mr. Schluter had known that there were these men, all of them partners in the silk shop, that he would not have referred to them also, as he in fact did in his first letter to the German Consul? Mr. Schluter himself answers this question in the negative. Is it conceivable that Mok Kun at a time of some anxiety both for the firm and for himself, as compradore liable on the transaction, if the money were not forthcoming, should not have told Mr. Schluter who was writing, as he knew, to Canton to take action on his information, that there were 3 men partners in the Cheong Loong, not one? Is not the conclusion inevitable that he did not know, and therefore that the whole of the details which he has incorporated into his story are mere fiction? This too must be borne in mind. Mok Kun knew that all the three men were partners in the silk store: he is not so foolish a man as to believe that he could seize property belonging to 3 men, because one of them only was a partner in the sugar shop. He must have known the risk he was making the defendants run when they were seizing the property because he said it belonged to one only.
Mok Kun realised this as well as anybody: he said "I always told Mr. Schluter that there were 3 men in Canton." Mr. Schluter says he did not, and this is the fact. The facts seem to me abundantly plain: Mok Kun had known these men for some years: he knew what the relationship between Leung Tsin Pang and the silk store had been: he probably thought or knew that like himself they had been asked to join the firm; and then when the time of anxiety arrived he made a desperate effort to bring in first one, and then three of the silk merchants: and then he props up his story by padding out certain events which did in fact happen with conversations which he has invented to suit his purpose. The trick is a clumsy but quite familiar one.
413
10
questions, ou the answers to which the final decision must depend, for there are several groups of circumstances on which the question whether these men were partners in the Cheong Loong depends. But as the question involved in the motion is whether the verdict is against the weight of the evidence it is material as I review the evidence with regard to each branch of the case for me to express my views whether the verdict is against evidence on that part of the case: and I shall then be in a better position to answer the ultimate question on which the fate of this motion depends.
There is however in connexion with this part of Mok Kun's evidence a much more important question which throws much light on the truthfulness or otherwise of his story.
The importance of this evidence is that Mok Kun, if his story is to be believed, knew all along that these 3 mei were partners in the Cheong Loong: it is not a case of an impres- sion acquired subsequently, and re-enforced by random recollections of these festal gatherings; he tells us he knew at the time. He would have us believe that it influenced his conduct in the second, the "interviewing period"; but what he has not explained is that he did not breathe a word of this story to Mr. Schluter of Reuter, Brockelmann & Co. during the discussions he had with that gentleman pre- paratory to the letter of February 21st being written to the German Consul. This is a point I shall have to go into in greater detail in connexion with the answer to the 3rd question, but it must for the purpose of the present question be taken to be a fact that not only was nothing said as to this early kuowledge or the grounds of it, but the first intimation to Mr. Schluter was that one of the 3 only, the "rich man of Canton" was the partner: and that the names of the other two were only introduced subsequently. The letter of 30th January was written by Mr. Schluter to the branch in Canton after consultation with Mok Kun; it refers expressly to Leung Lai Sang as the proprietor of the sugar shop, and only to him: he is also referred to as the owner of the Kwong Hing Cheong. It refers to him with special precision as the man whom Mok Kuu had induced a few weeks previously to put up the $5,000 security; and the branch is requested to induce him to sign a paper bind- ing himself to take delivery of the undelivered sugar and to pay the amount due. Is it conceivable if Mr. Schluter had known that there were these men, all of them partners in the silk shop, that he would not have referred to them also, as he in fact did in his first letter to the German Consul? Mr. Schluter himself answers this question in the negative. Is it conceivable that Mok Kun at a time of some anxiety both for the firm and for himself, as compradore liable on the transaction, if the money were not forthcoming, should not have told Mr. Schluter who was writing, as he knew, to Canton to take action on his information, that there were 3 men partners in the Cheong Loong, not one? Is not the conclusion inevitable that he did not know, and therefore that the whole of the details which he has incorporated into his story are mere fiction? This too must be borne in mind. Mok Kun knew that all the three men were partners in the silk store: he is not so foolish a man as to believe that he could seize property belonging to 3 men, because one of them only was a partner in the sugar shop. He must have known the risk he was making the defendants run when they were seizing the property because he said it belonged to one only.
Mok Kun realised this as well as anybody: he said "I always told Mr. Schluter that there were 3 men in Canton." Mr. Schluter says he did not, and this is the fact. The facts seem to me abundantly plain: Mok Kun had known these men for some years: he knew what the relationship between Leung Tsin Pang and the silk store had been: he probably thought or knew that like himself they had been asked to join the firm; and then when the time of anxiety arrived he made a desperate effort to bring in first one, and then three of the silk merchants: and then he props up his story by padding out certain events which did in fact happen with conversations which he has invented to suit his purpose. The trick is a clumsy but quite familiar one.
413
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.