CO129-383 - Public Offices - 1911 — Page 46

*}

12000

MEMC FANDU

IMEL

Rur 13 APR

15306

In answer to Sir Havilland de Sausmerez's Memorandun

on Companies inclosed in his despatch to APR 191

the Governor of the 19th Jamery 1911.

45

We have considered Sir Havilland's Memorandum, and

we desire to submit the following observations with

reference to it.

With regard to winding up we are clear that the

Hongkong Court is the only proper Court to make the order

for winding-up, having regard to the fact that the Com-

panies in question are registered here.

It seems clear also that any orders of whatever

character, which affects any change whatever in the

register fall within the Jurisdiction of the Hongkong

Court.

As regards paragraph 1, on page 7 of Sir Havilland's

Memorandun, we submit that it is important to every Court

that its Jurisdiction should be preserved intact, and that

there is no sufficient cause shown why an exception

should be made in the matter of winding up,

We agree,

however, that auxiliary powers ought to be conferred on

the Supreme Court of China in winding-up matters, to the

intent that it may have power to make orders, consequential

upon the winding up Order of the Hongkong Court, against

British subjects within its Jurisdiction.

As regards paragraph 2, on the same page, we contend

that the words, "or in part" should obviously be omitted,

because, if left in, they would have the effect of ren-

dering a Hongkong Company, which was not only registered

here but also carried on the bulk of its business here,

amenable to the jurisdiction of H.M. Supreme Court for

China, even though only one hundredth part of its business

was carried on outside of this Colony.

Vay