CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7] — Page 298

063

DOLJİBOQ Vrocortniteen" - Level-al-er 17" 3einegro) enido

[xtenso-steluono).M.6.H

.38€/ ̧linga br53,isqasd?

Enclosure No.1 in Shanghai Despatch No.91 of 23rd April,1920, to Peking

.ce.oй

No.114/20.

Sir,

Registry, Supreme Court,

294

Hongkong, 8th March, 1920.

i

19jjar end ni somatoie se of Tuonon sit ever I

•

ert 19bau nożno? ni baretsiyer reineqros no zaiorotas to 975cm,&sinegros Sief to [lonuo) ni zebr0 (neimsgro0) snido Juenbuoad (soinnquet) anith end to E sloidra d‡i▼ „X18389001

.P[el to flomwo) mi te9b10

ed to noijinog edd of balles em noitnstje yM -NOW TIED MOs rate ons botimid (iertzred?) vanqrob no gaby and Hotel até no em Jnen snotno!' de torteine? odd pack tapeong odd yĺstraroos aaditoneż doidw dode;set bezolone gmidt to stałe DISTÝNA

.baecione nele ni vigor vs to yɖoo

bne benyen.aist oBis tongvoi add yang [foord sih

Bolanquod eni ilid Jism of em gnizes dɔ182 agyi uc eJOIW

CICI odd diw ebionica od 88 08 abname cov JIVI to 99JAMİDTÛ

Je peżnob of batesimmsco pileinitto ton som doig,19LTO

.oursi to emit adj

ngże odd to swen yne bread,I9vewon,Jon eved I eds seroine of slasnu me I síidwasam bros esnanibr0 gribners be .of baTTatar slitrs

Je 901710 misrod odd Jedd dragkus od muktov I

nivo of waiv s ddiw stoet svode act to barotni ad set hoitourdeni umeacaoen ödü suani od scist) [einofor Comarnic10 bebama atiaiuper add to potang

.ods,svad I

. .1

.be

. Leren - Inenst

1.8.0 ...,noj8la

MimiM =ʻgenated BİL

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of

your letter of the 2nd March relating to certain questions arising under the China (Companies) Amendment Order in Council,

1919.

2.

Upon the facts stated in your letter it seems clear that the Wing On Company (Shanghai) Limited is a China Company within the meaning of the above Order in Council. These facts

were not disclosed to me by the company here.

3. In the concluding paragraph of your letter you state that you have informed Mr. Kwok Bew that you consider his com- pany a China company within the meaning of the 1915 Order in Council. I take it that "1915" is a clerical error for *1919".

4. Unfortunately, the law in this Colony on the subject

is still the same as it was in China under the 1915 Order in

Council, and I venture to suggest that it would be advisable to defer taking any proceedings under the 1919 Order in Council against any company at present on the Hongkong register until the law in this Colony has been altered so as to make it agree with the latter Order in Council. Otherwise, an awkward situation might be created. A company might be fined summarily at Shanghai on the ground of its being a China Company, while the Supreme Court of Hongkong might be obliged under the Com- panies Ordinance, 1915, to hold that the company was not a China company and was properly on the Hongkong Register. Further, there would be no means of transferring such a company to the Shanghai Register against the consent of the Company unless it happened to come within the definition of China Company in the Ordinance. Perhaps a still more awkward

the Registrar of Companies, Shanghai.