CO129-387 - Individuals - 1911 — Page 76

70

Shanghai or elsewhere, by empowering such Companies to keep local registers outside the Colony.

Mr Harcourt is advised that these sections cannot be regarded as ultra vires in view of the opinion of the Law Officers of the Foreign Office communicated in the letter of the 8th July 1900 wherein it was held by this Department that it was not ultra vires for the Legislature of Hong Kong to pass Ordinance No.16 of 1907 enabling Companies registered under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance of 1895 to keep local registers of their members outside the Colony.

3. This was communicated to the Foreign Office in the letter of the 8th July 1909 from this department.

The alternative method of incorporating Companies carrying on business in China would be to establish a Register of Companies in Shanghai, involving the creation of Shanghai Companies under Shanghai jurisdiction to the entire exclusion of the Companies of Hong Kong. Mr Harcourt would not however be prepared to recommend the adoption of, or assent to this course being taken seeing that in addition to the legal and practical difficulties involved, it would entail a considerable loss of revenue to the Colony.

4. On the other hand, while therefore, Mr Harcourt considers that Companies carrying on business wholly or in part in Shanghai can and should continue to be registered in Hong Kong and that the Hong Kong Court should have jurisdiction to wind them up and to possess all the other powers legally resulting from their registration in Hong Kong, he fully recognizes the fact that the Supreme Court of Shanghai has a reasonable claim to exercise certain jurisdiction either concurrent or auxiliary, as would be...