[
    {
        "id": 218394,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-005 - Sir Henry Pottinger - 1844",
        "page_number": 267,
        "title": "CO129-005 - Sir Henry Pottinger - 1844",
        "content_text": ": \n\nto \n\nSuch instrument \n\nwithin a certain time after execution. \n\n4-And be it further enacted that all judgments deeds wills conveyances or be registered instruments in writing hereafter obtained made or executed, which shall be duly registered within the respective times next mentioned: \"that is to say \" all deeds conveyances and other instruments in writing (except wills) which (if executed in Hongkong or its dependencies) shall be registered within one month, or which if executed in any other place shall be registered within twelve months after the time of execution thereof respectively, and all wills which (if the devisor die in Hongkong or its dependencies) shall be registered within one month, or which (if the devisor die in any other place) shall be registered within twelve months, after the decease of every devisor respectively, and all future judgments whe's shall be registered within one month after the entry or recording thereof, shall severally be in like manner entitled to priority, and shall take effect respectively by relation to the date thereof, only in the same manner as if this Ordinance had never been made. Mode of Registra- \n\n5. And be it further enacted that the registration inten 'ed by th tion by a Memorial Ordinance shall be made in manner following, that is to say \"a Memorial containing certain containing the particulars herein after specified shall be delivered into the said particulars to be de- Land Office, signed (in case of deeds conveyances or other instruments in writing except wills) by some or one of the parties to the original deed or instrument, or if such parties be dead or absent from the Colony, then by one or more of the witnessess to such deed or instrument, and (in case of wills and devises) signed by some or one of the devisees or his or her guardian or trustees, and (in case of judgments) signed by the plaintiff or plaintiffs: and every such Memorial shall be verified by the oath of some competent person, that the same contains a just and true account of the several particulars therein set forth, which oath shall be taken before the Chief Magistrate of Police, or before any Justice of the Peace of the said Colony. \n\nlivered to the land officer. \n\nParticulars which \n\nZain. \n\n6.--And be it further enacted that every memorial of any judgment shall it is necessary for contain the following particulars,\" that is to say \" the names and additions of the the memorial to con- planitiffs and defendants respectively, the sum thereby recovered or secured, the time of entry or recording the same, and the sum of money bona fide due thereon; and every memorial of any deed or conveyance will or other instrument shall contain and set forth the date of such deed conveyance will or other instrument, and the particular nature and object thereof the names and additions of all the parties to such deed conveyance or instrument, and of the devisor devisee or devisees of such will, and the names and additions of all the witnesses thereto, anf shall especially particularize and express the parcels of ground tenements aud promises affected or intended to be affected by such deed conveyance will of instrument, and the proper and ordinary or accustomed names of the places where the same shall be situated, and (except in cases of wills) the pecuniary or other consideration for the same, in the form or to the effect of the form numbered i in the Schedule hereunto annexed. Provided always, that when there shall be more writings than one for perf cting the same conveyance devise or security affecting the same parcels of ground tenements and premises, all such writings shall be stated in one and the same memorial, in which it shall be sufficient to particularize such parcels tenements and premises only once. \n\nSuch memorial to \n\n-And be it further enacted, that on delivery of any such memorial as be numbered by the aforesaid, the said Land Officer shall number the same according to the order of Land Officer and a receipt to be given \n\ntime in which it shall bave been so delivered, and shall give a receipt for the same, for the same and in which receipt shall be specified the certain day and time of day when such Land Officer shall memorial shall have been so delivered, and the proper number thereof in the endorse thereon a Register of the said Land Office, and he shall also in like manner immediately certificate of the day indorse on the back of such memorial a certificate, containing the day and time of & hour when such memorial was deli- day when the same was so delivered, and the name and place of abode of the vered into his Office person verifying the same, and shall sign the said certificate when so indo sed and such certificate to be such certificate shall be taken and allowed as evidence of the registration, and evidence of the time time of registration of every such judgment deed will devise conveyance or other of Registration of \n\ninstrument whereof such memorial shall be so made. the Memorial. \n\nThe Memorial to 8. And be it further enacted that every such memorial shall, as soon after be registered as soon the receipt thereof as practicable, be carefully registered by the Land Officer, in as possible in a pro- regular succession as received, according to its proper number, in a particular book per book and be de- to be kept by him for that purpose, and shall afterwards be deposited by him in posited in a secure place in the Office. some secure place in his Office, and there kept for future reference when required, \n\nLand Officer to \n\nand he shall also keep an index of the parcels of ground tenements and \n\nprim'ses keep an index of mentioned in every such memorial, and also a like index or indexes of the names of places and names the several parties to conveyances and other deeds and instruments, and of devisors vennected with the and devisees in wills, and of the plaintiffs and defendants in case of judgments with \n\ninstruments so re- accurate references in all such indexes respectively to the number and page of gistered with correct \n\nregistry of the memorial to which any entry in sucli index or indexes shall relate. references to the pro \n\nper page of the Re- gistry book. \n\nenter satisfiction for \n\nForm of the certi- ficate of satisfaction \n\nmortgage. \n\nIn case of mortga 9. And be it further enacted that in case of mortgages and judgments ges and judgments registered in pursuance of this Ordinance, if at any time afterwards such verified Land Officer shall certificate as is hereinafter next mentioned shall be brought to the said Land the same on receiv Officer, signed by the respective mortgagoers and mortagagees or plaintiffs and ing a verified certi- defendants or their agents respectively, and attested by two credible witnesses, ficate as after des whereby it shall appear that the whole of the monies due on any such mortgage cribed. \n\nor judgment have been fully paid, or that such mortgage or judgment is otherwise satisfied, then the said Land Officer shall make a short entry or memorandum thereof on the memorial and on the margin of the registry of such mortgage or judgment, and shall afterwards carefully register the sanie certificate in one of the registry books of his office, and the Land Officer, shall make an entry thereof in his index or indexes, referring accurately to the page of registry of such certificate. 10. And be it further enacted that every such certificate shall contain the on a judgment or following particulars; \"that is to say\", (in case of judgments the names and additions of the plaintiffs and defendants, the time of entering upor recording the same, the sum or sums thereby recovered, the date or dates of payment or other satisfaction of the amount bona fide due thereon, and in case of mortgages the names and additions of the original parties, the date of the instrument, the sum thereby secured, and the time or times of payment or other satisfaction thereof, and every such certificate shall be verified by the oath of some competent persou, that the same contains a just and true account of the several particulars therein set forth, which oath shall be made and taken before the said Chief Magistrate, or before any Justice of the Peace of the said Colóny, and on the back of such verified certificate the Land Officer shall immediately indorse the date when the same was received by him, and the name and place of abode of the person verifying the same, and the said certificate shall after being so indorsed and entered as aforesaid be safely kept in his Office for future reference when required. Any person may \n\n11-And be it further enacted that it shall be lawful for any person or deposit in the said persons whatsoever to deposit in the said land office for safe custody any convey- Office any deed will or other instrument ance deed power of attorney or instrument in writing whatsoever or his or her last will and testament of which deeds wills conveyances or other instrument the said land officer shall (first giving a receipt for the same) immediately make an entry or entries in a book to be kept for that purpose to which book he shall keep an accurate alphabetical index having reference therein as well to the name Wills when so de- of the testator or parties to each such deed or instrument as to the person or posited for safe cus- persons depositing the same and the said Land Officer shall carefully and securely lody to be wrapped keep all such deeds wills or other instruments in his said Office until required by up in an envelope the party or parties depositing the same to deliver them back again. Provided testator or testatrix, that every such will or testament shall be cnclosed within a cover or envelope; On the death of sealed with the seal of the testator or testatrix, whose name shall be endorsed by testator or testatrix the Land Officer on such envelope or cover, and every such will shall retain in Land Officer shall the said Offre until the dicense of the testator or to statrix unless he or she shall deliver the will to previously require the same to be delivered back, and upon the death of the the first named ex- testator or testatrix the said Land Officer shall (after examining such will) deliver \n\nfor safe custody. \n\nunder the seal of. \n\necutor \n\nOr \n\nto any \n\nperson ordered to the same to the executor first named therein, or to such other person as shall be receive the same. duly authorized to receive the samë. \n\nOfficer or subordi- \n\nduty. \n\nPenalty on Land 12.—And be it farther enacted that if the said Land Officer or any other nate Officers wilful person employed in the said Land Office shall wilfully neglect or omit manner hereinbefore directed any memorial ly neglecting their to number register or enter m \n\nor certificate delivered into the said Office, he shall for every such offence forfeit and be liable to pay to Her Majesty Her, Heirs and Successors for the public purposes of the said Colony, the penalty or sum of five hundred dollars, and be Wilful destruction further liable in damages to the party injured to the extent of the loss or injury Forgery or altera sustained. And if the said Land Officer or any clerk or person whatsoever shall tion of any register wilfully destroy embezzle or secrete forge counterfeit raz? deface or alter any intent to defraud or memorial or any part thereof or any indorsement made thereon or any entry or injure punishable registry thereof in any book in the said office, with intent to defraud or injure any with 7 or 14 years person or persons, such Land Officer clerk or person so offending shall be guilty of trans ortation. \n\nfelony, and being thereof duly convicted shall be liable to be transported beyond Correction to be seas for any term not less than 7 years and not exceeding 14 years. verified by signature of Land Officer. \n\ned instrument with \n\n13. And be it enacted that all corrections by erasure interlineation or otherwise in any memorial of the registry of any document required to be register- ed by this Ordinance shall be noted and set forth at length in red ink in the margin \n\n",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-005 - Sir Henry Pottinger - 1844.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 223737,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-017 - Sir John Davis - 1846 [7-12]",
        "page_number": 154,
        "title": "CO129-017 - Sir John Davis - 1846 [7-12]",
        "content_text": "Mr. Hawes \n\nI presume that these Rules of Court went out to be dispersed in the same manner.\n\nThe last sent out, that is, that thing which will be Misallowed in order that they may be republished & then submitted to the local Legislation for confirmation by an Ordinance.\n\nThis is evident, because in the greater & the more Public Acts, and of being confined to the Propriety subjects of judicial Regulation, no Stint. The Public effect, Laws in making of the most permanent & general concern.\n\nI have to refer to ults ago ) will have a complete code respecting the administration of Succession & of the X for in burying.\n\nAll local Authority 5.4 hov. 30 But Period fire then date be this kept back lake hatter the Judge to Legislate such topics.\n\n21331 Ak Honble. W. E. Gladstone- 4th September, 1846. Violone, Hongkong Fir J. H Davis, 4 Inclosures.\n\nNo 106. Received Rules of the Supreme Court of Hongkong and transmitting additional Referring to dispatch No.103.\n\nIn 1603 H. King \n\nSUPREME COURT OF HONGKONG. ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION. REGULA GENERALIS. ANNO OCTAVO VICTORIE REGINE, 11th November, 1844.\n\n1. IT IS ORDERED, That when any person shall die leaving a Will, the person in whose keeping or custody it shall have been deposited, or who shall find such Will after the Testator's death, shall produce the same to the Registrar of the Supreme Court, within fourteen days after his decease, on pain of being prosecuted and punished for the concealment thereof, besides being civilly liable for any damages which shall have been occasioned by the delay; and he shall also make oath, or produce an affidavit (Form No. 1) verifying the time and place of the death, and stating, if such be the fact, that the Testator has left property within the jurisdiction of the Court.\n\n2. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That the Will so produced, shall be proved by the witnesses thereto on oath (Form No.2) in open Court, or before the Registrar thereof (who is hereby authorized to administer such oath) if they be resident within the colony of Hongkong; or by affidavit sworn before a person duly authorised to take the same if not so resident. If in the case of the Will of a soldier in actual Military service, or Mariner or Seamen at sea there be no Witnesses, then by proof of the Handwriting of the Testator, if written or signed by himself; or if neither written nor signed by the Testator, then by the person who wrote it.\n\n3. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That after the Will is so proved, a Petition shall be given in to the Court, by the Executor or Executors, praying for Probate thereof; to which petition an Affidavit, (Form No. 3.) by the said Executor or Executors, shall be annexed. Probate (Form No. 4.) shall then be granted to such Executor or Executors under the Seal of the Court. But if any of the Executors named in the Will be out of the Island of Hongkong, or shall not appear at the time of granting such probate, a clause (Form No. 5.) shall be inserted therein, reserving a power to grant like probate to such absent Executor when he shall appear and sue for the same.\n\nProduction of Will. Affidavit of Death. Will how proved. Petition for Probate. Affidavit by Executor. Probate. If no Executor. Citation to next of kin. Commission of Appraisement.\n\nAND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That if there be no Executor named in the Will, or if none of the Executors named therein are within the Island at the time of the Testator's death, or if being within the Island they refuse or neglect to appear, or renounce their respective trusts, in any such case, a Citation (Form No. 6.) to the next of kin shall issue, directed to the Sheriff of the Colony of Hongkong or his Lawful Deputy; and a Commission (Form No. 7.) shall at the same time issue to two creditable persons, to appraise the property left by the deceased, which citation and commission shall be made returnable within such time respectively as the Court shall judge reasonable, and shall be executed by the Sheriff and Appraisers to whom they shall be respectively directed; but in case the Sheriff shall not be able to discover who are the next of kin, or if their residences be not known to him, he shall execute the said Citation by Posting a Copy thereof, with a translation in the language of the deceased (if not an Englishman) on the door of the Court House, and the Registrar shall then cause an Advertisement to be inserted in one of the local Newspapers to the same effect. On the return of such Citation if the Widow, or Widower, or next of kin of the deceased appears and applies by Petition for administration, and no opposition be made thereto, or if such opposition be made and overruled by the Court, then letters of administration (Form No. 8.) with the Will annexed shall be granted to such Widow or Widower, or next of kin, on his or her giving Bond (Form No. 9.) with two good and sufficient securities for the due execution of the Will, (reference being had, in requiring such security, to the amount of the property returned by the appraisers) and on his or her taking the oath of administrator.\n\nAdministration with Will annexed. Bond.\n\nPage 119",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-017 - Sir John Davis - 1846 [7-12].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 233555,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-043 - Sir Bonham - 1853 [7-12]",
        "page_number": 64,
        "title": "CO129-043 - Sir Bonham - 1853 [7-12]",
        "content_text": "62\n\nTHE CHINA MAIL.\n\nCharitable laaits\n\n3.1.\n\nleads to the conclusiva that the expense\n\nIV—Provided always that all religious edifices, hospitals, jeme exempted from teries, and buildings strictly and exclusively appropriated tahari- of maintaining and extending it, if self- table purposes, and not being used as dwelling-houses, sall be imposed, would be less grudgingly paid, exempted from assessment under this Ordinance.\n\nGOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION.\n\nNotice is hereby given, that the exclusive right of dealing in laun, Betel, and torment of col with the advice of the excentive Council, shall have powers apment. Betel Leaf, in the Colony of Hongkong, will be disposed of to the highest bidder at: Public Auction on the 20th day of June, at the Office of the Chief Magistrate of Police.\n\n[1]\n\nBy order,\n\nVictoria, Hongkong, 31st May, 1845.\n\n16\n\nProvisions for the\n\nJoctors,\n\nCollectors to malo\n\npoint such officer or officers as may be deemed requisite for te col- lection of the Rate leviable under this Ordinence, allowing in or them as remuneration for this service such a per Centage at the Governor in Council shall seem fit.\n\npaper the Report of a Trial on Appeal\n\nWe have extracted from an Edinburgh before the Louse of Lords, the subject being one of great importance to alt British colonists. The statule establish- ing dutics on legacies equaily affects England and Scotland, and the present decision settles the law, that such duties are not payable on\n\nAnd be it hereby enacted and ordained, that as soon afer the casual reters and first day of January in each year as may be founul practicale, the pablish officer collecting the assesstrent under this Ordinance shall gepare a detailed statement exhibiting the sums collected during de pre- ceding year, and the said statement, duly attested by the said ficer, shall be inserted in some newspaper published within this Clony, officer for one month from and after the date of its publicatio\n\nby a person re\n\nVI—And be it hereby enacted and ordained, that the saf rate such property being subject to the law of\n\nsiding in one of its possessions abroad- Quarterly in advance shall be payable quarterly in advance, unless otherwise prefribed the colony where the deceased\n\nand directed, as hereinberare mentioned, and that it shall be charged ciled. This judgment is not only impor was domi- and chargeable on the lands, dwelling-houses, and premises repect- ively assessed, at the time of such assessment.\n\nand shall also be open to general inspection at the office & such | England, if bequeathed invested in\n\nException as to\n\ncapted, or used\n\nFREDERICK W. A. BRUCE,\n\nColonial Secretary.\n\n憲。 告\n\nRate payalde\n\nT\n\n赴人在榔茲\n\n賣\n\n辦正等港\n\n此堂物等\n\n事衙於處\n\n者署五招\n\n特 THAA\n\n示 於投十包\n\n是如六質\n\n該要巡簍在\n\n署包理葉\n\n投\n\nB\n\n# B &\n\nexetorted.\n\nN\n\n一千八百四十五年五月 三 十\n\n日\n\n年四月\n\n二十六日\n\nFJ\n\ntant to British colunists, but may be\n\nΠΟΣ\n\nnot unwillingly substitute the following from a correspondent:-\n\nof benefit to England, by encouraging\n\nAnd be it hereby enacted and ordained that the omber of investments there. So important aid the property mat let, or any land, dwelling-house, or premises assessed, which may fot be\n\nlet to any tenant, shall be deered the occupier thereof. privided this question, that though neither he always, that if such owner can shew that the property las nt been the other low lords entertained any inhabited for a period of three months or upwards in any year, he doubt, it was submitted as an A. B ques- shall be entitled to a proportional abatement of assessment leted on the same for the said year.\n\ntion to the Judges, because, as the law\n\nAppeal against as\n\nwas to be stated definitively, for the\n\nVIII—Provided always, that if any person from whom payment British Islande, and for all its colonies, esten der pay- of the assessment leviable under this Ordinance may have been the Lords deemed it proper that the meo the\n\ndemanded, and who shall have already paid in the amount demanded decision should have all the weight of him, ohjects to the demand on any other ground than that of which the concurrent opinions of the valuation, it shall be competent to such person, after payment of Judges and of the Lords could give it.\" the amount demanded, to appeal against such demand to the Chief' Justice of the Supreme Court at such time and place as the said:\n\nWe had proposed to give a short critique\n\nChief Justice may be pleased to direct, or that if any person be dissa on the Concert of Thursday last, but tisfied, or objects to any valustion to be made under this Ordinance on the ground of over-valuation, he or they may, within the period of three calender months after such valuation, or when the said Chief: Justice may appoint or direct, appeal to him against such valuation, and that it shall be lawful for him, if he deem it advisable or neces- sary to have any three persons taken from the existing let of special jurors to assist him in ascertaining the question of value which may arise on\n\nDistricts may be\n\nIX—And be it further enacted and ordained, that it shall and n any such appeal. may be lawful for the said Governor, with the advice of the said Executive Council, to exempt such districts or portions of the said Island from the operation of this act, or from the payment of the said rates, as to him and them may seem advisable.\n\nX—And be it hereby enacted and ordained, that un asessment made under the authority of the Ordinance shall be impeached or affected by reason of any mistake in the name of any person liable to assessment, or of any thing chargeable with assessment, provided the directions of this Ordinance be in substance and effect complied with.\n\nclause.\n\nTriplomatic Department.\n\nGOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION.\n\nHis Excellency Her Majesty's Plenipotentiary and Chief Superintendent of British Trade, &c. &c., is pleased to direct that the sunexed Circular to the address of Her Majesty's Consuls in China he published for general information.\n\nBy order,\n\nVictoria, Hongkong, 31st May, 1845.\n\nCIRCULAR No.\n\nADAM W. ELMSLIE.\n\nVictoria, Hongkong, 31st May, 1845.\n\nI have to acquaint you, that I have received the Commands of Her Most Gracious Majesty, conveyed through the Right Honourable the Earl of Aberdeen, sanctioning and confirming Ordinance No. 6 of 1844, intituled, An Ordinance to authorize the execation of the Process of the Supreme Court of Hongkong in certain Parts within the Dominions of the Emperor of China.\n\nI have, &c.\n\n(Signed)\n\nJ. F. DAVIS.\n\nTrue Copy:\n\nADAM W. ELMSLIE,\n\nTo Her Britannic Majesty's Consul at\n\nTisle.\n\nPreamble.\n\nClovernor to p\n\nIsland.\n\nHONGKONG,\n\nANNO OCTAVO, VICTORIE REGINE. No. 2 of 1845.\n\nBy His Excellency JOHN FRANCIS DAVIS, Esquie, Go- vernor and Commander-in-Chief of the Colony of Hongkong jad its Dependencies, lur Majesty's Plenipotentiary and Chief Sperin tendent of the Trade of British Subjects in China, with the idvice of the Legislative Council of Hongkong.\n\nAn Ordinance to raise an assessed Rate on Janda, houses, and premises, within the Colony of Hongkong, for the upholding of the requisite Police Force therein.\" WHEREAS it is deemed expedient and necessary that the Colony of Hongkong should defray the Expenses attendant on the upholding and maintaining the Police force thereof.\n\n--Be it therefore enacted and ordained by the Governor of point haters of the Hongkong, with the advice of the Legislative Council thereof that lands. house it shall and may be lawful to and for the said Governor, with the mies within the advice of the Executive Council, from time to time to appoint two ar more persons for the purpose of estimating the annual vaide of the lands, houses, and premises within the said Island, or within any particular district thereof, which shall be in the tenure or occupation of any person or persons; and the said valuator or valuators shall, when thereunto required, make a retum in writing and on oath of such valuation to the said Governor and Coureff; and also at the time of having valued each property respectively, he proprietor thereal, a written Notification of their having made such or they shall leave or cause to be left with some inmate or the valuation, sod of the Amount thereof.\n\nIl—And be it further enacted and ordained that for the purposes of this Ordinance, the said Governor and Council may cause a new valuation to be made annually.\n\nILL--And\n\nValuation may be made anually.\n\nAssessment to he Trade on the d\n\nJyment, andromedy for nonpayment.\n\nbe\n\n|\n\nInterpretation\n\nAnd be it further enacted and ordained, that this Ordinaner shall come into operation and take effect, from and after the first day of Julf next ensuing.\n\nPassed the Legislative Council of Hongkong this 93d day of May, 1845. ADOLPHUS E. SHELLEY,\n\nClerk of Councila.\n\nJ. F. DAVIS, Governor, &c., &c.\n\nour present rulers every thing will be done with the utmost economy: but that does not affect the principle, against which we conter.d.\n\nThe right of the mercantile commu- pity to a voice in the Legislative Council has frequently been urged, not, we think, with much force of reason; for until the revenue of the colony is sufficient to pay its expenses, we do not ace that the in- habitants can claim representation as a right, and upon any other grounds it\n\nMessrs Fiebig and lavac's Concert took place according to announcement on Thurs day evening last, and the attendance was in very respect calculated so answer the ex pectoris of the originators, who well de Berve encouragement for their attempt to the ennuyés of Victoria. afford an evening's rational entertainment to deservedly applauded for his brilliant ex\n\nM. Rarac was eeution of the very difficulty picces allotted to him, sad met with an unanimous encore in the Caroival of Venice.\" His notes are remarkably clear and expressive, and by a himself of a few mannerisms, he might with little attention to his style, in order to divest study become a first rote performer on this most difficult of instruments. M. Fiebig was not so felicitous; his well known skill and tirely unworthy of his efforts. The \"Bella\" execution, were expended on a theme on- he dimittel. le proved himself to possess\n\na correct judgment and highly cultivated\n\ntaste, by the simple yet appropriate manner in which he accompanied M. Ravac, instead of displaying in mastery over the instrument by profuse ornament, at the expense of the melody itself, a fault too common among musicisms. The programme was a striking example of the lied taste which is unfortu Dately I too prevalent in the days with thrown aside for the modern Italian school, regard to music. The great masters are new The Messiah must give place to the Stabal Mater, and Iton Giovanni to Don Pasquale. Verily, Rossint, Donizetti, Belliei, Pacini, Auber, &o, ae but peor substitutes for Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Weber, Fiebig and Barac should favour the inhabi tots of Victoria with another Concert, or Gluck, Cimarosa, or Parsiella. If Messrs\n\neven a series of Concerts, and we think they have ample encouragement for so doing, what\n\nTHE CHINA MAIL.\n\nHONGKONG, THURSDAY, 8TH JUNE, 1245. Is another part of to-day's paper will be found an important Ordinance by the Governor in Council for assessing the inhabitants with the expenses of the Police establishment. The advantages\n\nwhich the community derive from a well organized system of police are so self-evident, that a reason- able rate for its support is perhaps one of would be worse than useless. the few direct taxes that in civilized the case is different with municipal of his great countryman the composer of countries are submitted to without affairs. Here, it is proposed that the Fidelio, or M. Ravac delighting his auditors de tot anticipate whole charge of upholding the police or Vietti; and, if the prevailing taste is so that even those who, like ourselves, should be defrayed by the inhabitants, strongly expressed in favour of modera with the touching compositions of Corelli maiorain that it is a mistake\" policy who thereby, we conceive, establish a music, let us have it good at least, something to overburden the youthful energies of just claim to avail themselves of the con- by Spohr, Cherubini, Mendelssolu, er the colony with taxation, will find much stitutional right of British subjects to be Beyerbeer, for instance. to complain of in being called upon consulted both as to the levying and dis- to contribute their quota for uphollingposal of the fund. In London, though\n\nmormer; and WH\n\na treat it would be for a true lover of nute to hear M. Fisbig displaying his taste nad But exception on some of the majestic sinfonias\n\nPEKING GAZETTE.\n\nhridegroom was\n\nthat\n\nthe force requisite for the protection, nearly one-fourth of the expenses of the health, and comfort of the community. police establishment is paid out of the Con-rial Princess with one of the Mangal chieft THE COURT—The marriage of an Imps- amble of the Ordinance, we conocive to watch over the interests of the rate But though we thus concur in the pre-solidated Fund, there are commissioners has given rise to not a little trouble. The that its enacting clauses are objectionable peyers; and in Edinburgh and (ilasgow, riage celebrated without delay, and he mast defining the power and jurisdiction of the assessment on the inhabitants, they at- to the customary rule, directed that astronu- on two grounds, First, not clearly where the whole amount is raised by an\n\nan early day should be fixed for the core. police, a term of wide signification, and Dually elect representatives,\n\nmony. The Emperor, however, according which in the three United Kingdoms to the sale power of determining the per Board, to ascertain when the heavens would\n\nwho have made to include very different classes of centage, as well as its appropriation. be propitions for the celebration of the nup mical observations should be made by the functions. The Ordinance does not in- These Commissioners have, properly, tials. Unfortunately the members of the for us whether this preventive branch judicial functions; but except that the Board ware not mautious in reading the of justice is to be rendered so efficient in appointment of Superintendent is lodged agus of the stars, and after a great many Hongkong as to supersede the necessity in other hands, they are onnipotent calculations, drawing of horoscopes, and con- for the individual tax which the inhabi as regards the extent and remunera tants have hitherto been compelled totion of the force, as well as in all that persofthe day, they fixed on the 23d April at submit to in maintaining private watch relates to lighting, cleansing, removal\n\nthree o'clock in the morning as the most tion is the more pointedly directed by arrangements of the fire brigade. And at that hour. This is said to be the earliest men--a circumstance to which our atten- of nuisances and obstructions, and the able for that ceremony. The Royal pair joined in drinking from the nuptial cup the intimation from the Chief Magistrate we which appeared in the Cuts MALL only Geomy, these matters are nowhere the celestial empire,\n\nbelieve that in efficiency and hoar at which a marriage has taken place in better managed out of London, if indeed The King of Korea has again asked the the metropolis is an exception. tants who might consider them worth $10\n\nEmperor to sanction is marriage with one a-month. It seems necessary to under-there aced be no fear about the sua patent for that pa pose. The Emperor Were such a plan adopted in Hongkong, of the damsels of the Court, and to grant but stand whether we are to have a police ciency of the supplies, and we should look have hitherto been carried by a body of so generally effective as to supersede the confidently to a gradually improved sys Mandarins deputed by the Emperor for has acceded to his requeat. Such documents\n\na fortnight ago, tendering the services of\n\na night constahle to any of the inhabi-\n\nsultatious with the most celebrate! philosu-\n\nThis will add\n\nit further enacted and ordained, that for the purpose valiation and provi. of levying the said rate, a per Centage at such an amount in the sic:t for periods of hundred as muy annually be determined on by the Governor with the payment, notice of advice of the Executive Council, not exceeding such a sum as sball assessment, period of be equal to the expenses of the Palice establishment, shall be as- necessity for private watchmen, or if, betem from the suggestions of a body of that purpose, but on the present occasion a sessed and paid in respect of every such valuation by the occapier sides this heavy tax, we are to be called judicious and interested commissioners, single civilian only has been despatched or owner of cach parcel of ground, house, or building, within such upon to contribute to the support of a Protection of life and property, sanatory with it to the Prince. time and times as the said Governor, with the advice of the said Council, shall direct, or as is hereinafter provided. In the absence of auch direction and in default of the same being so paid, it shall be Jawful for any person or persons oppainted to collect the suid tax to apply to the Chief Magistrate of Police of the Island, who shall, on satisfactory proof of the same having been duly demanded and being due and\n\nJunsatisfied,\n\ngrant his Warrant to levy the same by distress of any goods on or in the lands, houses, or premises so rated; and that any such\n\nrate, while unpaid, shall be a lien on the property so assessed, or charged therewith, Provided always that when and so often as any assessment shall be made on any such valuation, the particulars and nature of such assessment shall be published in one or more public newspapers of the said Colony.\n\nforee, which, from the intimation alluded regulations, and whatever tends to the another Queen to the numerous Ilarem to, it may be inferred the authorities do comfort and convenience of the public, of bis Royal Highness. not consider to be entirely efficient. are matters of imperative necessity, Tau Lord Mayor of Puking reported, that The other objection we have to the acknowledged by every friend to public beavy showers of snow had fallen in the measure is that the inhabitants are not safety and good order; and the adminis-, during the beginning of March; and allowed a voice in fixing the rate, or tration of the law for securing these ends be looked for, he suggests that a day of public as a good wheat harvest might accordingly io determining the modo in which it is to be applied no other limit being pro- those of the community who are to enjoy Emperor has received his suggestion favour\n\ncan never be placed in better hands than thanksgiving should be appointed. The posed than what may seem to the Co-the benefits, and who are caliel upon to ally. vernor, with the advice of the Executive contribute the means of securing then, Council, sufficient for upholding or main- Without forgetting or under-vaining the taining any extent of force that may he salutary efforts of our rulers to provide an appointed. We have no doubt that with organized protective force, experience\n\nSome Mandarins, of high rank, arrived\n\nfrom Kwang-tung and Yan-an, whose baggage consisted of no less than one thou- ordinary quantity, they were interrogated sand packages. This being rather an\n\nBA-\n\nas to the contents, and the reply that they contained letters and despatelies for the tribunals, no being satisfactory, they were ordered to he opened and inspected. Ten were found to contain documents, but the contents of the remaining 990 have not been made public.\n\nP\n\nOn releasing the Petit Jary from their long and fatiguing labours the fan. Recorde complimented them on the zeal and jade ment which they had displayed, and his Honour stated, that he coincided in every verdict they had given.\n\nlfonso of Lorda, February 17. THOMSON LORD ADVOCATE OF SCOTLAND.\n\nTHE CHINA MAIL.\n\nSITTING OF THE SCPI Colar, 2 June, 1945,\n\ndesired to name a son, he named 105 dollars,\n\n63\n\nA difter-\n\nstating the Admiral's desire to pay any c FOREIGN Goops with a Britist Chance- munendon for the services of the vossal\n\nT—During the past year numerous in- which Matheson might think G and stonees have occurred of goods buying bren (From the Hongkong Register] This was a writ of error against a judg\n\nA Special Jury was empanneled for thre meat of the Court of Exchequer in Scotland trial of an action raised as the instance of the manensient, but expressed his willingness to\n\nreason. Mr Matheann refused any ve brought to this country for home use or ex- The facts of the case are those John\n\nportation to foreign puits, with labek attach- Grant, a person born in Scotland, but who Crown against the Editor of the Friend of acccptacy couneration on the part of the ed, giving, or purporting to give thean, a had left that cuantry sad become domiciled: Ching, for the publication of the following\n\ncrew might think proper. When desired British character in a foreign market s in Demerara, died in that colony, in the\n\nto name a sum, be said, the Admiral may this, if allowed, would be highly detrimental Article in his 'isue of the 13th July last, Treasurer Tang-ting-ching, the late Gover-year 1887. He had acquired considerate, which was alleged to contain a libel against think very different from us and being to the British manufacturer, the goods have nor of Canton, and who will probably property while in Demerara, and had trans- Sir Thomas Cochrane:-\n\nin every instance been detained by the Reve- reesive the first van Governorship, osmitted saare portion of it to Scotland, at It will be in the all-rtion of many of our The letter M Me Matheson stated that the me officers, as being impuited contrary to recommended his inferiur officers, whe no- the time of his death, a banking house there Loaders, that Her Majesty's ship Wolf, got on a schooner had been detained 18 hours in conve the provisions of the act in that regard; the terially assisted bin in clearing large trace held property of his to the amount of\n\nbank somewhere below Woosneg, and has for the quence of the service rendered to the Wolf only relief given having been that the goods of land in Kan-sub, to the notite of govera- £18,000. Probate of his will was taken timely aid of the Schooner Fetes, Capt. Caer, sier Goddard in addressing the Jury for Mr have been allowed to be returned to the purt ment, as worthy of promotion.\n\nont in Scotland, by tho present appellant, as\n\nwould have been obliged to acrifice he cons and Carr, ill be felt eansiderable difficulty of shipment, the labels or other mode of in shot before she curld here'got n The Wolf took appearing before them in such circumstances.fringement having been firstromovel. These bis executor, and payment of the money due\n\nthe bank at high water, mud and not possibly have Mr Cur bad been accused of publishing a labels have usually contained the Royal arms having boea brained, in was transmitted to It is with touch regret we learn, from a\n\nbocu fiased again, without grandly reducing the dead hel, \"toulously, winkedly, and malicious of Enghel, will the name, in English, of Demerara. The law officers of the Crown weight on board. Then fast descried by the Fern, y\" Mr Carr, he believed, knew very little the importer in London, or other place in lang memorial of Lea, Governor-Genersi of\n\nclaimed from the executor the son of £1800 ahr, the Way had a sign.d of distress lying, ani Che-eang and Fo-keen, that the rise arup as legacy duty duo from him in respect of there can be no doubt that, hack it came in to be high and in these seas Sir Thomas, except on a person holding a the United Kingdom, ss the case may be, the in Pormasa hoe failed, also that the Granary the property of the testator existing in Scot- whilst she was lying in a mitical position, she\n\nname and description of the contents bring is now exhausted, and that the price of grain Lad. The case went before the Court of\n\nwand ham gore bo pres. The Pinot Pan niongailia, however, in this case did not act as a judge, also given in the English language, evidently is daily rising in Fo-keen. Leu has ardered Exchequer in Scotland, where Ford Gillies and took out all ver artament, 15 send 41,42 th. The ly Judge of Admiralty here is the intending to envey the impression in a extensive purchases to be made in Che-keang delivered a judgment declaring that the\n\nshot, and it was net wat relieved of this weight clut | Lord Chief Justice. Neither does he accuse foreign market that the goods were of British and other places, and wishes that the public legary duty as payable in the manner de ser altercaties fabu to the her guns overhard, either in his publie or his private character, time since of a parcel of esses containing se again loated; without this since she had no bin ofhay rbing eriminal, or of an offence mamifacture. An instance occurred a short granaries should be opened.\n\nmanded. The prosent writ of error was then brought. The ease bad been argued vage, and before any Adiralty socte sum\n\nor go to pisees on the ink. This is a clear case of which implied guilt. He never acted him paper for letter-writing being brought for of coruption. He only accuses him that he CANTON—Rumour states that the light two years ago, and now came on again for awarded the Foren for for aid would be siderable.\n\nexportation, etch sheet of paper having thos was not so bieral as he ought to be, A\n\nword Barle\" primed in the usual manner at ning struck the palace of Lieutenant-Gver. argument by one counsel on a side.\n\nAt the time the affair occurred, tar Admisal Sir Me Kelly, on the part of the appellant\n\ncriminal libel has been filed against Mr Carr, the left hand corner, and the packages them- nor [wang, and damaged, bis snutf-box. Themas Duebrang was at Chusni, when it arced. In consegnace of the way the accusation selves containing the paper the Brilish aras This, it is said, has made so strong an impres¦ (Mr Anderson was with him,) fosisted that between him are the Cipam of the Vares, that the has been brought, he was pot to great ex- einblazoned thereon. They were, of course, sion upon the grandee, that he has since been the legacy duty was not payable here. The question: of compensation atould be lett open ancil duty was demanded under 36 Geo. III, c. wrapt in deep thought and revery.\n\nSir 1 homas Cochrane avtored to this enlony. Altor penser, as the frown pays on costs; and if immediately detained, and application WAY he seeds, as I aux sure he will, he will made for permission to retard them to the 152, sec. 2, which enacted, that all legacies Thonan return, the cwners generaly waived\n\nabove the amount of £20, given by any will\n\nall claims fre salvage, marely requesting the Rear rill here to pay all his own expenses. Be port of shipment, but the intention in this (From the Singapore Free Press, 1st May.) or testamentary instrumcat, shoald pay le-\n\nAdmiral to remouense the Captain and eve for their sides the case has been deferred from time instance being so evident, the goods wer The Criminal Sessions were finished on gacy duty. Fe submitted that thang those elite similar te their own, Sir Thomas Cachane on long ago. Fir Thomas might have put ed, which was accordingly done,\n\ntrouble, never doubling then retunded by a spirit to time, whereas it might have been brought ordered to be seized and the parties prosecut Saturday Jast, the 28th ult. having lasted words were of the most extensive and gene rash hudumaly reward de vore of Fist himself into the witnesa box, and so might ence is made where the name and inscription four weeks, 18 persons were discharged on ral kind, the aut did not apply out of Great Majesty's slig. In doing thy they committed a Mr Waller, and thee we should have had an on the label is in the French or other foreign Saturday, no witnesses coming forward Britain. The aut could not extend even to\n\ncapital cere, to who justice and magnanimity opportunity of seeing what was right and language, although the British armus may be against them. No blame attaches to the our colonies, without some word expressly ey had entrusted the liquidatio of the cases what was wrong, or at least we should have Police in this instance, as the parties had including them, and there were no anche Captain and are of the Kareemid not fi\n\nengraved thereon, it being considered that words here. That being the case, the gene print much ganeanu facdage, and taking advantage\n\nhad an opportunity to cross-examine them, the act is not thereby infringed in const- been regularly bound over to appear nord\n\nquence. Timca. give evidence. In some cases there is leral rule of law applied that the personal pro- of the antideles is displast, he offered to award and of proving that Mr Matheson was not informed of the facts. Mr Bradshaw, the doubt that bribery has been resorted to inperty followed the fair of the domicile of its all $10, in the proportion of $4 for the quain\n\nfirst officer of the Fire, was on beard when I\n\nTHE HOPELESS SESSION. order to keep back evidenco. In van oase, a owner, and consequently as the domicile of $20 Ckiy Oficer; $16 Gunnar; $1 each for the Crew- charge of murder, the widow of the murder the testator here was Demerara, the low of take advantage of us Iter &iral's meannes, ant dewee was tatran in this court before a Com\n\nWe need actualy gette tha: Catón Carr would not the Wulf hoisted sigands of distress: his evi-\n\nWhat change has come over the public ed person, though she had appeared before that place unst govern the administration of\n\nwithin these few years Where be all the in is instance Her Majesty's ship has got off missioner. Mr Carr did not ferret out the the Grand Jury, was not to be found when his assets. Prubate but necessarily been fie fad the Fizen been the party cunt talon out in Scotland, because the Bankers\n\neager conjectures regarding the grent mea cireunastanees; \"hey were brought to him by the case came on for trial.\n\nwan in expardy unit the readers a Captain Carr, who complained of the waut Parliament aas supposed to lie pregnant? sares with which to coming session of who were the debtors had not honestly paid aquistanes, we would have had the matter certleil 1\n\nof liberality. F. M's Ships are generally People do not even take the treble to fore had been paid, but the claim here was what was due, and the probate duty there a very different mumer. Sie Thores mental op-\n\nvalued at £1000 per gan-the Wolf has 18 So which at times appear scleri -wor for legacy duty, which was clearly not pay\n\nguess what may be coming. Suficient for guns, nod may, therefore he vained at able As a very strong instance of the mis\n\nLeco fally opened to the importance of the service,\n\nThe day is the evil thereof. They will see and if such a question were left to his award, wo har 18,000, and for saving her 100 dollars are\n\nthe debates when they begin. Public emio- chief that would arise if the doctrine now\n\nIf Sir Thomas close to take ou nat the slightest doubt that the which awardedi. contended for by the Crowe could be sup\n\nsufficient for the 'em, would hure aweled bits himself the office of fixing the reward, be it is as languil is the opening of St A Chinese was executed on Monday week ported, it was only necessary to mention this\n\nchongauls for the War. We regret exeedingly to\n\nought to have exercised the strictest care to Stephen's as it has long been at the opening for murder. He taule a long speech when case, Suppose an Englishman resident They injure the dignity of the series not a litte: Carr, hearing that Sir Thomas was about to\n\nnatice such a crtions is the me now mantined. make himself acquainted with the facts. Mr of the patent theaires, No new pieces are the scaffold, protesting is innocence, abroad, or a foreigner traded with a person\n\nronounced as in preparation. Somo leading danouncing the witnesses against biu for in England, and at the death of the former a\n\nand alcough no thinking man would jrdys unferour-\n\nactors have cutired, and no onw ones ara commener an action against him, made every advertised. Nobody asks wht is to succeel perjury and threatening to beat them bill of exchange accnpted by the person io\n\nably of those whose merits Eater zee: so often tested, enquiry, in order that if he had done wrong. Lol Stanley in the Tybalt line, or Mr in conacquence of the lile minded actions of their afer his death. He acquitted the Judge this conmry was ranning, no parment of peat Chief, we are bound to acolodge, that to\n\nbe might rearess it by making an ample adstone in the heasy tragedy. There are and fury of all blame, as they had only acted that bill of exclange could be made without\n\napology but the more he did enqore, the to be rehearsals on Monday at Sir Robert the thoughtless and ipsmant, such tr.les uvey an according to the evidence, and be declared a deduction from the legacy duty. No one unfavourable, though file impression of the nasal stronger be found the facts. To costine Peri's (in full dress) and the Dake of Well- that in order to remove all cars from the cook pretend that a rale so mischievous to chare. Si Theme Cochrane, if we recoller Jibel it most the show that the party is Judge's mind, he, the prisoner, would bang commerce could exist, and the Hanse must, right, has been a candidate for parliamentary hưn charged with something that is criminal.ington's but the maies of the pinses in himself and he accordingly placed his head in therefore, act on the Authorities already des\n\npar: once, at least, he stood for a seaport, Mr Bradshaw's evidence is to this effect has invited his friends to be early in their\n\npreparation are not asked. the balter. He was very collected, and took cided, which had settled that the law of the\n\nthe pret buffetini inhalants of which are slip The Wolf was in great distress, firing gutus, attendances but the Opposition Fader a polite leave of those near him by bowing place where the testator died nust goverato distinguish himself in the nature of his country dwares; should the gallant Adunai ever again sek\n\nand baving her ensign with the Uniou down, ems to dust whether it is worth the to them, and at last, shaking hands with the the adutinistration of his personal property.\n\nThe Fire stood in and sent her boat to the while of his friends to we trust the affair we matrate will be prestained off to offer assistance. The Fixes had a 'Comeli whether it is worth tas while ot come, and Mr exceptioner, was launched off.\n\nThe Solicitor-General (with whom was bit the hastings, as we ate afrail would shin large pantity of specie on board. She re- bis to stay away. The Three Mays convinted of the rauder Me Crompton) did not deny the existence of in the eyes of any consergy intarestol in the\n\nThe tradesmen evince ceived 16 guns and 500 shut, and he consime animation in farbisting up the Houses, of Captain RBIsos of the Bluck twt, were some general rule as to the law of domicile, mesutile -hipping of Geet Britain.\" executed on Saturday last, and acknowledged but cuntended that it had nothing to do with\n\ndered the Voit would have been in extreme The following were the Jurymen on the\n\nand the grooms in exercising the cream- their guilt.\n\na case like the present. The principle of case,Thos. Jones, Esq., Duacan Flether, danger bl a gale come out. law that raust govern this case was, that Es, Angus Fletcher, Bay. F. T. Bush, Esq. aliona tendency to prevent others from giving pervade th actors and spectatus. Never coloured horses of the state-carriage; int TheJulge here asked, \"had not this public with these exceptions, apathy and langu where the property was balaistered the J. Leffler, Esq. and George Findlay, Esq. TRULY SEAMAN-LIKE CONDUCT. Captain legacy duty must be paid. If there had beeu The attorney-fineral in opening the case chassistance?—Mr Goddard said he thought before it the public appear to expect so Captain Caldwell, fate of the ship Durchester, of a specifs appropriation of the property in stated that this was an information on the ! \"xpressly the reverse, as it showedsuch per- little from a session will it be possible to Boston, tas pebliched the following amount: Sotland, this rule would not have applied, part of the Queen, to defend the character\n\nsous their age would be taken up by the press disappoint that little? Our faith in the Mr Bradshaw's videuce was then read. disappointing powers of Parliament is great. Captain Brition, of the Rochester, fell ja | but there was no appropriation The money of Sir Thomas Cochrane, who had awarded with the Dorchester at sea, a pertent Greek, recoveral there formed part of the general a sum of 100 dollars for services rendered and at great hazard rescued her officers, crew, assets, and was therefore liable to the lagney by the Fire to the off, as the fall salvage\n\nto an anchor near her. She had 144,000 severely trial-Sperlotur. and passengers from an untimely fate. duty. He contended that all the cases which claimed that Mr Car, well knowing the Caphan Caldwell says, \"The Rochester was bad been dated on this subject did not premises, took the occasion to vilify the stroring a course which would bare carried touch the subject of duncile, but related Commander-in-Chief as having acted aritra her about three miles north of us. The mo❘ wholly to that of the appropriation artit that when services were rendered to H. M. Barisfied with the award—He thinks the ons example of official economy. A crea-\n\nor non- rily, haughtily, and unjustly, and to state\n\nLouis Philippe's Ministers have get a tort- ment the wreck was seen, the course of the appropriation of the property, The Rochestor was altered for one directly for us. gentleman farther contended, that where a Ships, no adequate reward would be paid, remuneration illiberal, and injurious to other tion of Peers was intended, and the names of At that time,\" said Captain Britton to one party acted in the discharge of dutios of To this charge Mr Care at Girst pleaded vessels requiring assistance—Thorew help the Pencs were almost authoratively an afterwards, I had no idea that there could administration to a deceased person, the Not Guilty, but to-day he has added as a to take the guns, &c., on board—Witness nounced. Thone persons, of course, would be a living being on board of her; but I legacy daty is payable in respect of the money farther plea, that all he had stated was true, did so, and was powell in consequence—The be bound to Ministers for the coming session; have made it au invariable rate through life, he received and dealt with in that charseter, and published for the benefit of the pallie acevant in the Friend of China was not enig but what a waste of the coin of Court fa whenever I see a wreck, to get as near her The Lord Chancellor put the following Hy was aware that whenever there was angered The Fizen was detained 24 hours- vour! Ministers take second thought, and A. Matheson, Esq., being called as a vit postpone their creation until after the dis- as possible, and ascertain all I can about her, questions to the Judges:A B., a British Fattempt to check such objectionable publica- and make sure that there is nobody aliva on subject, born in England, resided in a Bri- tions, there was raised an outery that it was\n\nnews and sworn, deposed, that the Fizm be-\n\ncussion on their whole policy in the Cham- board before I leave her. We supposed, hetish colony, made his will, and died domiciled for the purpose of curbing the fibres and the chip of Jardine, Matheson, & .. hers. This is the true economy: every sup\n\nawarded nothing to the Crew continued, it was some timbership which there. At the time of his death debts were Press. The Government bero had no wish\n\nporner will wat himself down for a peerage, Secretary of Sir Thomas Cochrane called and each one prize will attract many gamblers had been drifting about here for months;awing to him in England; his executor in to do so.--an ollicer discharging the high and wished him to do so—the Viren bad for it. As if to show practically that the but resolving that I would adhere to my rule, England collected these debts, and out of duty of Admiral, and in this case acting as a I altered my course, although we all thought the money he collected paid legacies to cars\n\nJudge of the Admiralty, is complained of it useless at the time. Thus, by following tain legatees in England are such legacies a partial statement of the frots is brought the service rendered by hue was very made one sample Peer—M. Jaubert, an Op. this noble rule, Captain Britton was the able to the payment of the legacy daty? forward; for if the whole facts had been slight, and the crew were not employed at positionist. Spectator.\n\nAll—Captati Care was not satisfied with the mexas, in the hauds of God, of saving the He had fransed the question in this general stated. Sir Thomans Cochrane would have\n\nAdmiral's award, but did not ask witness's lives of 45 human beings, and in the circle of form, beranse the statute equally affected suffered no damage. A persoa in such vir-\n\nadvice as the course he ought to punue their friends and acquaintance, of making the England and Scotland,\n\ncumstances ought not to be so negligent as hearts of hundreds sing for joy. Captain The Judges requested short time to to pablish partial statements. The Admiral he is the assistance he gave was very im- portaut—Mr Waller did not make his state- Britton received me on board \"his ship with consider their answer. They retired for is charged with gross partiality and verup-\n\nment a upoo bis own knowledge, but na a welcome and a shake of the hand which this purpose, and at the end of about half an tion as a judge. You\" (the Jury) will not\n\nwhat he noderstood--Witness thinks that ac went to the heart, and spoke at once the sea- hour returned, when\n\nfail to perceive the motive on the face of the man and the gentleman. So long as memory Lord Chief Justice Tindal read their article.\n\ncording to Captain Carr's statement of the ser Will you ever believe chat Sir\n\nvices reutered, 100 Dollars was ootanfficient, retains her seat, I shall not forget his kind- answer, to the effect that, though the words Thomas was influenced by such motives, and ness. Taking me into his cabin, Consider,' of the statute could not apply everywhere, that this was published for the beaclit of the\n\nCross-examined by the Attorney-General said he, everything here at your service, the principle which ran through all the le public, and not to gratify some private feeling saw nothing on the part of Sir Thomas or Here are my clothes, use as many of them asided case was, that the domicile of the de- against him? It may produce the most\n\nMr Waller to lead him to believe they wished you need. And such was his treatment of ceased party gave the law which regulated prejudicial effoot for if this article is ciroz\n\nto retreat from their offer to give a proper us votil we arrived at New York, and then, the distribution of the personal property; lated among the mercantile wavy here, should remuneration. When asked to manie a sunt, witness said high Government officers were said he, Here is my purse at your service this ride was not affected by the situs of the another of Her Majesty's Ships got inte\n\nften stingy, and he believed Sir Thomas was for what moung you need? flow different personal property itself, or by the place tu similar circumstances, it would deter them the result, and how diferent must be the fee which the administrator received that pras from residering their services. I have au particular trouble. ings of Captain Britton from what they porty, and that, consequently, the law appli- thing to say against the serving rendered by\n\nThe Attorney-General said that Sie Thomas was of necessity discharging an office of high wonid have been, if he bad passed by and re-cable to this case was the law of the colony the Vire taking out guts, shat, &n. ported, Lat. 50 N., long. 20 W, saw a ship, where the deceased was domiciled at the This, I admit, it was a clear caso of salvage, Ministerial duty, se at that time there was no Totally dismasted, sea, making a complete time of his death, and was not the law of Sir Thomas bad to wish to deny this. Te Court of Admiralty here, breach over her: weather equally, and im England, consequently that the legacy daty said to his Secretary, Mr Waller, I know The Judge, in susuming up the case, said ing on night; could ascertain nothing further was not payable here.\n\nnothing of this case you will call on Methe bel was divided into two parts first a that the Lord had sent at thers to marry her, abour ber. Such are too often the reports, The Lord Chancellor expressed his fall Matheson and learn what be claims.\" Mrtement of facts, and secondly a commen! Betty, without much hesitation, replied,The but I hope we shall see no more of them. coneurrence with this opinion, and went Waller did call, and Mr Mathieson very tary on these facts. The first was passed Lord's will be done.\" Edinburgh Evening Courant.\n\ninto a very exact examination of the cases liberally refused to receive anything. Mr over. It was for the Jury to judge if there\n\nThe Premier\n\nThe Fixes was ordered by the Wolf to conte but on the present vesion they will be Tarls of silver on hoard. Thinks it was in\n\nsequence of the relief afforded by her that\n\nthe Wolf got off. Two vessels bave sincr bero wrecked there. The crew were all dis-\n\nHOW TO MAKE A PEERAGE GO VURTHEST,\n\nnot then returned to Hongkong Me Waller competition is open to all, Ministers have\n\nAN AMRICAN CONE AND 19 Swann, A Colonel of the Chised Sanes Army having rofused to obey the esmuunds of his superior cfficer, with sentenced by the courbeartial in↔ be deprised ní his sword for one month.\" On his weapon being demanded of her, he aroes, and in the mud gale and solema amer declared, that he didn't own one: that the sword be had been accustomed to wear Giln't being to him; but he had no dobi Mr Baker, the jeweller, f whow be hired it B waining days, would int it to the Court for the re quired mouth on the most reasonable terras 1\n\n'rovidence Guzeite\n\nFace ResigNA CON,-Deacon Mavis of Lyne Crevicu, Farge alludder and exemplary man, was exceedingly cocentre in some of his noticus. His courtship is in sus, was as follows:-aving The any pointed his horse, with only a nap-ssin fer a sad, be rede in front of the hause wherea Betty Lec lived, and, without dismounting, reguesial\n\nJetty to come to linn; on her eing, he told her\n\nyu this subject, which, he said, completely. Waller natted what compensation would be was a necessity first to publish these facts; AN EYE TO THE FUTURE—At a meeting, von justified the opinions of the learned Judges enough for the crew of the Vixen. Mr secondly was it necessary to publish this red by the friends of Clay, held in Woodstock, All sorts of people are plunging into the He begged to add, that the reasons why the Matheson said about 105 dollars, to which cotourstory. Had Mr Carr rested with a Vend, e ele oratore grew arazingly exontent, frightful whirlpool of railway speculation.Judges had been summoned to give the Mr Waller answered, say in round numbers statement of facts, it is probable you exchiring, ever heard of a woulan's warning Bankers and merchants, barristers and baber-House their resistance in this case was, tint 100 dollars. Mr Care puts an imaginary would not have been troubled with this paper sun after Jana K. Polk P\" and den pude a dashers, bankers' clerks and doctors of divi- as the law was to be stated definitively for case to injure Sir Thomas. Ho says, bail secution. Sir Thomas was not likely to have sig diffene pause, if inviting an awwer. nity, Members of Parliament and keepers of the British islands and for all our colonies, the Vixeu been the party that was in jeopac brought an autiou, and he was sure his friend did exclaims a fair decorat in the cred, win gambling-houses, old oren and young lads, the Lords had deemed it proper that the de dy,\" &. The last paragraph could only be the Attorney-General would not have taken hd boy married about six months proves, Bat married women who desire to have a good cision abould have all the weight which the pennet by some person who had a personal up such a case. But this was not the sting have en tha! intends to.\" speculation on their own account, and spin-concurrent opinions of the Judges and of spleen against the admiral. If any of you of the libel. It is for you to say whether Sir sters who think that an addition to their their Lordships could give it. He moved had been called on to act as arbiter, and ia: Thomas is charged with corruption, and if soị\n\nMas Lova, Harmony House, Concord, near fortune might give them an opportunity of that the judgment should be given for the consequence of your award had been accused it is a huel. To order that words may con- Kusing Pains,” is the adureas of a school stress in sharing it with another-all, all are rushing plaintiff in error.\n\nNew South Wales. of corruption, you would feel what damages stitute a libel, they must charge a man with on in the same course-dying after the wheel\n\nLord Brougham and Lord Campbell save ought to be given in the present case. The something criminal: but in writing whatever of fortune, which for the present is laden at rally expressed their concurrence with the affidavit of Me Walle, which will be read to, tends to bring a man into contempt is a libel. every spoke with the shares of some railway motion of the noble and leverned. Lord. you, states, that he wrote to Mr Malevon The Jury, after a short consultation, res company—Morning Post.\n\nby the direction of Sir Thomas, a letter torneil à verdict of not guilty.\"\n\nJudgment for the plaintiff is error.\n\nFon—Never tell a mun he's a frol. In the Grat place he won't believe you; in the next beŋl be sure i think you one jou buying 10,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-043 - Sir Bonham - 1853 [7-12].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 241370,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-062 - Sir Bowring - 1857 [1-3]",
        "page_number": 395,
        "title": "CO129-062 - Sir Bowring - 1857 [1-3]",
        "content_text": "17.\n\n16.\n\nof\n\n\"their clients, which would\n\nAfterwards be disallowed on\n\nlaxation by him, or his Representatives in case\n\nof his\n\ndeath, whose duty it would be to have costs saved which their Testator might not have required. Your Petitioners\n\ntherefore submit that a revision of the scale of costs allowed by \"the Regula Generatis of thirty-first of October one thousand eight hundred and fifty-four ought to be made if the\n\ndistinction between party and party\n\nand\n\nSolicitor and client\n\n392\n\ncosts is to be abolished.\n\nThat Your\n\nPetitioners\n\nhumbly submit that it is a\n\ndangerous innovation to fix the fees to be paid to Counsel\n\nthat the same should be left\n\nas heretofore to be dealt with by the Taxing Officer subject\n\nto the direction of the Chief\n\nJustice in each case which comes before\n\nhim. Your Petitioners\n\nThat you respectfully approve of\n\nthe proposed\n\nAmendment which\n\nrepeals part of Section four\n\nas to costs of Interlocutory",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-062 - Sir Bowring - 1857 [1-3].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 262161,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-105 - Acting Governor Mercer - 1865 [5-7]",
        "page_number": 332,
        "title": "CO129-105 - Acting Governor Mercer - 1865 [5-7]",
        "content_text": "# THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 12TH JANUARY, 1861.\n\n## GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION\n\nThe following Calendar of Grants of Probates made under Ordinance No. 8 of 1860 is published for general information.\n\nBy Order,\n\nColonial Secretary's Office, Victoria, Hongkong, 7th January, 1861.\n\n**W. T. MERCER, Colonial Secretary.**\n\n## CALENDAR OF PROBATES and ADMINISTRATIONS granted by the Court of Probate at Hongkong during the year 1860.\n\n| DATE OF GRANT | NAME OF TESTATOR OR INTESTATE | PLACE AND TIME OF DEATH | PROBATE ADMIN-ISTRATION WITH WILL ANNEXED OR ADMINISTRA-TION | NAME AND DESCRIPTION OF THE EXECUTOR OR ADMINISTRATOR | VALUE OF THE EFFECTS AS SET FORTH IN THE COM-MISSION OF AR-RANGEMENT |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Jan. 11 | James Gray | June 27 | Probate | John Gregory of Hongkong, Mercantile Clerk, the sole Executor. | $1,146.43 |\n| 31 | Thomas Hardy | June 4 | Administration | Douglas Lapraik of Hongkong, Watchmaker, &c. | $500.53 |\n| Feb. 4 | Edmund Freely | June 8 | Administration | ... | $1,143.01 |\n| 20 | George Chape | July 14 | Administration | ... | $6,424.35 |\n| 25 | John Brown Compton | July 28 | Administration | ... | $1,331.89 |\n| Mar. 8 | William Bennett | August 8 | Administration | Graham Anderson of Hongkong, Merchant, one of the Executors. | $211.03 |\n| 20 | B. Trowsdale | Sept. 28 | Probate | Douglas Lapraik of Hongkong, Watchmaker, &c. | $448.80 |\n| 20 | Paulo Vicente Affonso | March 20 | Administration | Official Administrator. | ... |\n| 30 | George Urmson | March 19 | Administration | Louisa Kenny, sole Executrix. | $13,800.00 |\n| Apr. 9 | Ignacio d'Almeida Pereira | May 15 | Probate | Patrick Campbell of Hongkong, Banker, one of the Executors. | $7,638.04 |\n| Nov. 9 | Tunes McNicol | At Sea, 22nd May, 1860 | Administration | Official Administrator. | $67.83 |\n| 9 | Francis Stewart | At Sea, 5th October, 1859 | Administration | James Ignatius Dawson of Hongkong, Mercantile Assistant. | $64.82 |\n| Dec. 4 | Thomas Larkin Walker | Hongkong, 6th July, 1860 | Administration | Richard Henry Pearce of the ship Balaclava, the cousin and one of the next of kin. | $358.35 |\n| 16 | William Kelly | Hongkong, 26th July, 1860 | Administration | Official Administrator. | $270.20 |\n| 13 | George Wyborn | Hongkong, 10th Sept., 1860 | Probate | Delfino Noronha of Hongkong, Printer, the sole Executor. | $403.54 |\n| 29 | Hendrick P. T. Smith | Hongkong, 23rd Sept., 1860 | Probate | Candido Julio Ozorio of Hongkong, Mercantile Assistant, the sole Executor. | $1,150.90 |\n| Jan. 20 | John Swail Fisher Coleman | Hongkong, 16th Dec., 1859 | Probate | The Rev. W. R. Beach, Military Chaplain, and Robt. Scott Walker of Hongkong, Merchant. | ... |\n| Feb. 25 | Bernard Kenny, M.D. | Hongkong, 5th March, 1860 | Probate | Cheong Ahe of Hongkong, Comprador, one of the Executors. | ... |\n| Mar. 20 | William Henry Newman | Hongkong, 4th March, 1860 | Administration | Official Administrator. | ... |\n| Oct. 4 | Cheang Hoong | Hongkong, 1st Sept., 1860 | Probate | Christian Elizabeth Vaucher, wife of Albert Emile Vaucher of Hongkong, Merchant. | ... |\n| 11 | Hyuppa | Hongkong, 18th Sept., 1860 | Administration | Official Administrator. | ... |\n| 11 | Charles William Horder | Hongkong, 27th Sept., 1860 | Probate | Antoine Wouter Kup of Hongkong, Merchant. | ... |\n| 7 | William Baird | Hongkong, 13th Aug., 1860 | Administration | WiLane of Hongkong, Storekeeper, one of the Executors. | ... |\n| 9 | Adonia Rickomariz | Hongkong, 30th Aug., 1860 | Administration | Malcolm Macfarlane of Hongkong, Clerk. | ... |\n| 29 | Francisco Fortunato Marques | Hongkong, 24th Sept., 1860 | Probate | Geo. Morrison, Master Mariner, one of the Executors. | ... |\n\n**W. H. ALEXANDER, Registrar**\n\nPage 328\n\n## GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION\n\nThe attention of Shipmasters and Merchants connected with Emigration Business is specially called to the subjoined Notice issued by the Emmigration Officer for general convenience and information.\n\nBy Order,\n\nColonial Secretary's Office, Victoria, Hongkong, 7th January, 1861.\n\n**W. T. MERCER, Colonial Secretary.**\n\n## NOTICE\n\nEMIGRATION OFFICE, HONGKONG, 20th December, 1860.\n\nWhereas much ignorance prevails in this Port as to the Law and Regulations affecting Chinese Passenger Ships leading to perpetual reference, by Ship Masters and Merchants, to the Emigration Officer, for information on matters of ordinary detail and standing Rule: and whereas the Laws and Regulations alluded to are contained in various Imperial Acts, Local Ordinances and Proclamations and decisions of the Emigration Commissioners on matters arising out of the working of the system since it came into force:---(some of which documents are not easily procurable by the parties interested) it is therefore considered expedient by the Emigration Officer to publish in a condensed form the Rules in force in this Port relating to all Private Chinese Passenger Ships and Passengers, and as far as the provisions of the Imperial Act are concerned, to Ships chartered by a British Government Emigration Agent.\n\nAny vessel clearing with more than 20 Asiatic Passengers, on any Voyage of more than 7 days duration, is a \"Chinese Passenger Ship\" under the Act.\n\n1. The Ship laid on for passengers, the Master will notify the Emigration Officer by Letter of the fact, specifying the estimated number of passengers she can carry by Surveyor's Certificate, her destination, and the name of the Licensed Passage Broker employed.\n\nNote. After which, the Emigration Officer will take an early opportunity to inspect Ship.\n\n3. When the full quantity of passengers' provisions is on board the Master shall notify the Emigration Officer of the fact, who will as soon as possible thereafter, go off and inspect them.\n\nNote. The provisions must be all placed in the Tween decks or on the Upper deck, and not be stowed away in the Hold, until after inspection.\n\n9. When the Ship is ready to receive the passengers on board the Passage Broker will bring a written notice to that effect from the Master, when a time will be fixed for the attendance of the passengers at this Office to have their contract passage tickets explained and signed, in the presence of the Broker or his deputy.\n\nNote. This notice must be given at least 24 hours before the passengers appear at this Office, and on the same day the Master, with two approved sureties, will attend and execute the Bond under Section 1 of the Chinese Passenger Act 1855, and deposit the following documents :--\n\n1. Government Surveyor's Certificate of measurement and seaworthyness,\n2. Master's Certificate relative to Chinese Doctor (provided he fails in securing an European Surgeon for a reasonable remuneration.)\n3. Certificate under the Chop seals of two Chinese apothecary's Shops, vouching for competency of Doctor.\n4. List of provisions and medicines, according to the scale laid down in the Act, signed by the Master.\n5. Certificate of a resident Physician that he has examined the medicines, that they are good, and in accordance with the requirements of the Act.\n6. Passenger List in duplicate, with a Summary attached, specifying the numbers respectively of, Passengers under the Act, Cabin passengers, Crew, including Master and all persons on Ship's Articles; shewing total number of souls on board. Signed by Master.\n\nNote. Chinese Cooks, Stewards, Interpreter, Doctor, &c. are invariably passengers, berthed and fed with the others, although borne by Law on the Ship's Articles, for purposes of discipline. In future, their names, with their rating on board, will appear at the end of the passenger lists, and they will be included in the gross number that the ship can carry, but numerically they will be entered, as heretofore, under the head of \"Crew on Ship's Articles.\" About 4 Cooks and Stewards to every 100 passengers has been the rule.\n\n4. Either at this time or after the passengers are collected on board they must be inspected individually by a resident Surgeon, who must also inspect the Crew and give his Certificate that, none appear, by reason of any bodily or mental disease, unfit to proceed, or likely to endanger the health or safety of other persons about to proceed, in such Vessel.\n\n5. The Master will give notice when all the passengers are on board and when he wishes to clear for Sea.\n\nNote. The Broker must personally assure himself that every passenger is on board and report to that effect, after which the Emigration Officer will proceed on board, muster and count the passengers, and make a final inspection of the Ship.\n\nAfter this is done, and not before, the Ship is at liberty to shift her berth, if it is desired; the Master mentioning the fact to the Harbor Master; who will then deliver to him his Emigration Papers and Port Clearance.\n\nIn the fitting up and equipment of Chinese Passenger Ships the following general Rules will obtain\n\n1. Ships with full complement of passengers, shall carry boats according to the following scale, of size and description approved by the Emigration Officer :--\n\n| Registered Tons | Number of Boats |\n| --- | --- |\n| Less than 200 | 3 |\n| 200 to 400 | 4 |\n| 400 to 600 | 5 |\n| 600 to 1,000 | 5 |\n| 1,000 to 1,500 | 6 |\n| 1,500 and upwards | 6 |\n\nNote. In every case one boat must be a properly fitted Life boat, and one a Long boat.\n\n2. Ships must carry at least 2 Life buoys, slung, prepared for sudden emergencies.\n\n3. In the absence of a Forcepump and Hose, reaching fore and aft, a Ship must be provided with not less than 3 dozen buckets, in case of fire.\n\n4. Every Hatchway leading into passengers' quarters must be covered by a well secured House about six feet high, having as much ventilation as is compatible with strength, and being water tight. The Hatches are not to be used during the voyage unless stress of weather demands it.\n\nNote. When women are carried, they must have a separate hatchway entrance, apart from the Males; and the Male and Female quarters must be divided by a strong bulkhead with no door or aperture in it. The Female quarters must be aft, as also the Water closets for their use.\n\n5. The Berths, Cooking cabooses, Water closets, &c., must be all properly secured; and the Master must provide himself with two or three spare rice boilers, as they are very brittle, and liable to accident.\n\n6. In the very important particular of ventilation, the Government Notification `No. 51` of the 22nd April, 1856, is republished here, being not generally known.\n\n## GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION No. 51\n\nIt is hereby notified for the information of Masters of Ships carrying Chinese Passengers, and unprovided with the improved Appliance usually found in Vessels of modern construction, and generally for the information of all interested, that in addition to a Windsail for every hatchway, it is required that a constant supply of fresh air be ensured to the between decks in bad weather, by fitting, at each end of the Space set apart for passengers, two Funnels of wood or metal, Four in all, with moveable heads, in manner following, that is to say, the body of the air Funnel to reach from underneath the lowermost deck overhead to a height of 3 or 4 feet above the uppermost deck, and to pass through holes cut for the purpose in either side of the deck, and made water-tight by a canvas coat or other suitable means.\n\nThe attention of the Emigration Officer has been called to the above regulation.\n\nBy Order,\n\nColonial Secretary's Office, Victoria, Hongkong, 22nd April, 1856.\n\n**W. T. MERCER, Colonial Secretary.**",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-105 - Acting Governor Mercer - 1865 [5-7].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 263851,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "page_number": 125,
        "title": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "content_text": "# SSI\n\n## Notices in nature of citations. Procedure in suits for probate or administration. Custody of original wills. Official copies and certificates. Half-yearly returns from Provincial to Supreme Court. Interpretation Officer.\n\n48\n\nAfter such a notice has been filed in a Provincial Court, or after a copy of such a notice has been received by a Provincial Court (as the case may be), the Provincial Court shall not make a grant of probate or administration, but any grant shall be made only by the Supreme Court, under the immediate direction of the Judge.\n\n198. Notices in the nature of citations shall be given by publication in such newspapers, or in such other manner as the Court, in each case, directs.\n\n199. Suits respecting probate or administration shall be instituted and conducted as nearly as may be in the same manner as suits for claims of 100 dollars and upwards.\n\n200. All original wills, of which probate or administration with will annexed is granted, shall be filed and kept in the public office of the Supreme or other Court from which the grant issues, in such manner as to secure at once the due preservation and the convenient inspection of the same; and no original will shall be delivered out for any purpose without the express and special direction in writing of the Judge of the Supreme Court.\n\nAn official copy of the whole or of any part of a will, or an official certificate of a grant of administration, may be obtained from the Supreme or other Court where the will has been proved or the administration granted, on payment of the proper fees.\n\n201. On the first day of February and the first day of August in every year, every Provincial Court shall send to the Supreme Court:\n\n| Description | Details |\n| --- | --- |\n| A list | (Form 30) of the grants of probate and administration made by it up to the last preceding first day of January and first day of July respectively, and not included in any previous list: |\n| And also, a copy | certified by the Provincial Court to be a correct copy, of every will to which any such probate or administration relates. |\n\n## 11.-PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATION WITH WILL ANNEXED.\n\n202. In the following rules respecting probate and administration, the expression \"the proper Officer\" means, as to the provinces, the Consul-General, Consul, or Vice-Consul holding and forming a Court; as to the Supreme Court, such one of the officers attached thereto, as for the time being acts in matters of probate and administration by the authority and under the direction of the Judge.\n\n### Examination of will as to mode of execution.\n\n203. On receiving an application for probate or for administration with will annexed, the proper officer must inspect the will, and see whether it appears to be signed by the testator or by some other person in his presence and by his direction, and subscribed by two witnesses, according to the provisions of the Acts of Parliament `7 Will. 4. & 1 Vict. c. 26. sect. 9`, and `15 & 16 Vict. c. 24. sect. 1`, and in no case may he proceed further if the will does not appear to be so signed and subscribed.\n\n204. If the will appears to be signed by or for the testator and subscribed by two witnesses, the officer must then refer to the attestation clause (if any), and consider whether the wording thereof shows the will to have been in fact executed in accordance with the provisions of the said Acts.\n\n205. If there is no attestation clause to the will, or if the attestation clause thereto is insufficient, the officer must require an affidavit (Form 9) from at least one of the subscribing witnesses, if either of them is living, to prove that the will was in fact executed in accordance with the provisions of the said Acts. The affidavit must be engrossed and form part of the probate, so that the probate may be a complete document on the face of it.\n\n**And be it further enacted, that no will shall be valid unless it shall be in writing and executed in manner herein-after mentioned; (that is to say,) it shall be signed at the foot or end thereof by the testator or by some other person in his presence and by his direction; and such signature shall be made or acknowledged by the testator in the presence of two or more witnesses present at the same time, and such witnesses shall attest and shall subscribe the will in the presence of the testator, but no form of attestation shall be necessary,” \n\n\"Where by an Act passed in the first year of the reign of Her Majesty Queen Victoria, intituled, 'An Act for the Amendment of the Laws with respect to Wills,' it is enacted, that no will shall be valid unless it shall be signed at the foot or end thereof by the testator, or by some other person in his presence, and by his direction: Every will shall, so far only as regards the position of the signature of the testator, or of the person signing for him as aforesaid, be deemed to be valid within the said enactment, as explained by this Act, if the signature shall be so placed at or after, or following, or under, or beside, or opposite to the end of the will, that it shall be apparent on the face of the will that the testator intended to give effect by such his signature to the writing signed as his will, and that no such will shall be affected by the circumstance that the signature shall not follow or be immediately after the foot or end of the will, or by the circumstance that a blank space shall intervene between the concluding word of the will and the signature, or by the circumstance that the signature shall be placed among the words of the testimonium clause or of the clause of attestation, or shall follow or be after or under the clause of attestation, either with or without a blank space intervening, or shall follow or be after or under or beside the names or one of the names of the subscribing witnesses, or by the circumstance that the signature shall be on a side or page or other portion of the paper or papers containing the will whereon no clause or paragraph or disposing part of the will shall be written above the signature, or by the circumstance that there shall appear to be sufficient space on or at the bottom of the preceding side or page or other portion of the same paper on which the will is written to contain the signature; and the enumeration of the above circumstances shall not restrict the generality of the above enactment; but no signature under the said Act or this Act shall be operative to give effect to any disposition or direction which is underneath or which follows it, nor shall it give effect to any disposition or direction inserted after the signature shall be made.\" \n\nPage 49\nPage 48",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 263852,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "page_number": 126,
        "title": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "content_text": "# Will of testator, blind, obviously illiterate or ignorant.\n\nInterlineations, alterations, erasures, or obliterations.\n\n50\n\nIf on perusal of the affidavit it appears that the will was not in fact executed in accordance with the provisions of the said Acts, the officer must refuse probate.\n\nIf on perusal of the affidavit it appears doubtful whether or not the will was in fact executed in accordance with the provisions of the said Acts, the officer must lay a statement of the matter before the Judge of the Supreme Court for his directions. If both the subscribing witnesses are dead, or if from other circumstances no affidavit can be obtained from either of them, resort must be had to other persons (if any) who were present at the execution of the will; but if no affidavit of any such other person can be obtained, evidence on oath must be procured of that fact and of the handwriting of the deceased and of the subscribing witnesses, and also of any circumstances that may raise a presumption in favour of the due execution of the will.\n\n206. The officer shall not allow probate of the will, or administration with the will annexed, of any blind person, or of any obviously illiterate or ignorant person, to issue, unless he has previously satisfied himself, by what appears on the face of the will or by evidence on oath, that the will was read over to the deceased before its execution, or that the deceased had at that time knowledge of its contents.\n\nWhere this information is not forthcoming, the officer must communicate with the Judge of the Supreme Court.\n\n207. Having satisfied himself that the will was duly executed, the officer must carefully inspect the same, to see whether there are any interlineations or alterations or erasures or obliterations appearing in it and requiring to be accounted for.\n\nInterlineations and alterations are invalid unless they existed in the will at the time of its execution, or, if made afterwards, unless they have been executed and attested in the mode required by the said Acts of Parliament, or unless they have been made valid by the re-execution of the will, or by the subsequent execution of some codicil thereto.\n\nWhere interlineations or alterations appear in the will (unless duly executed or recited in or otherwise identified by the attestation clause), an affidavit or affidavits in proof of their having existed in the will before its execution, must be filed.\n\nIn like manner, erasures and obliterations are not to prevail unless proved to have existed in the will at the time of its execution, or unless the alterations thereby effected in the will are duly executed and attested, or unless they have been made valid by the re-execution of the will, or by the subsequent execution of some codicil thereto.\n\nIf no satisfactory evidence is adduced as to the time when the erasures or obliterations were made, and the words erased or obliterated are not entirely effaced, and can, on inspection of the paper, be ascertained, they must form part of the probate. In every case of words having been erased which might have been of importance, an affidavit must be required.\n\nIf reasonable doubt exists in regard to any interlineation, alteration, erasure, or obliteration, the officer shall, before proceeding further in the matter, communicate with the Judge of the Supreme Court for his directions.\n\n208. Where a will contains a reference to any deed, paper, memorandum, or other document, of such a nature as to raise a question whether it ought or ought not to form a constituent part of the will, the production of the deed, paper, memorandum, or other document must be required, with a view to ascertain whether or not it is entitled to probate; and if not produced, the non-production of it must be accounted for by evidence on oath. Any deed, paper, memorandum, or other document cannot form part of a will or codicil, unless it was in existence at the time when the will or codicil was executed.\n\nIf there are any vestiges of sealing wax or wafers or other marks on the testamentary paper, leading to the inference that some paper, memorandum, or other document has been annexed or attached thereto, they must be satisfactorily accounted for by evidence on oath, or the production of such paper, memorandum, or other document must be required; and if not produced, the non-production of it must be accounted for by evidence on oath.\n\nIf doubt exists as to whether or not any such deed, paper, memorandum, or other document is entitled to probate as a constituent part of the will, the officer shall, before proceeding further in the matter, communicate with the Judge of the Supreme Court for his directions.\n\n209. The foregoing rules respecting wills apply equally to codicils.\n\n210. Every will or copy of a will or other testamentary paper to which an executor or an administrator with will annexed is sworn shall be marked by such executor or administrator and by the person before whom he is sworn.\n\n211. The officer shall take care that the copies of wills to be annexed to probates or letters of administration are fairly and properly written, and to reject those which are not so.\n\n## Administration\n\n212. The duties of the proper officer in granting administration (not with will annexed) are in many respects the same as in cases of probate.\n\nHe shall ascertain the time and place of the deceased's death, and the value of the property to be covered by the administration.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 263853,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "page_number": 127,
        "title": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "content_text": "# Executor dying without proving, or not appearing.\n\n## Notice to next of kin.\n\n## Administration bond.\n\n## Assignment of and suit on bond.\n\n## In what cases these rules apply.\n\n## Time for award.\n\n52\n\n213. Where an executor appointed in a will survives the testator but either dies without having taken probate or being summoned or called on by the Court to take probate does not appear, his right in respect of the executorship wholly ceases, and the representation to the testator and the administration of his effects without further renunciation go, devolve, and may be committed in like manner as if he had not been appointed executor.\n\n214. Where administration is applied for by one or some of the next of kin only, there being another or other next of kin equally entitled thereto, the proper officer shall require proof by affidavit that notice of the application has been given to the other next of kin.\n\n215. Every person to whom administration is granted shall give bond (**Forms 18., 19.**) with two or more responsible British subjects as sureties, to the Judge of the Supreme Court, to enure in favour of the Judge for the time being, conditioned for duly collecting, getting in, and administering the personal estate of the deceased.\n\nWhere, however, the property is under the value of 250 dollars, one such surety only need be taken.\n\nThe bond shall be in a penalty of double the amount under which the personal estate of the deceased is sworn, unless the proper officer in any case thinks it expedient to reduce the amount, for reasons to be forthwith certified by him to the Judge of the Supreme Court.\n\nThe proper officer may also in any case direct that more bonds than one shall be given, so as to limit the liability of any surety to such amount as the officer thinks reasonable.\n\n216. The Judge of the Supreme Court may, on application, in a summary way, and on being satisfied that the condition of any administration bond has been broken, assign the same to some person, who shall thereupon be entitled to sue on the bond in his own name, as if the same had been originally given to him instead of to the Judge of the Supreme Court, and shall be entitled to recover thereon, as trustee for all persons interested, the full amount recoverable in respect of any breach of the condition of the bond.\n\n## X-ARBITRATION\n\n217. The following rules respecting arbitration apply exclusively to cases where the agreement for reference to arbitration or submission to arbitration by consent is made a rule of Court.\n\n218. Arbitrators shall make their award within one calendar month after they have entered on the reference or been called on to act by a notice in writing from any party, unless the document authorizing or making the reference contains a different limit of time.\n\n53\n\n## Enlargement of time.\n\n219. The Court may, if it thinks fit, on reasonable notice to all parties, from time to time enlarge the time for making the award for such time as it thinks fit, the reasons for such enlargement being recorded in the minutes of proceedings.\n\n## When umpire may enter on reference.\n\n220. An umpire may enter on the reference in lieu of the arbitrators, if the latter have allowed their time or their extended time to expire without making an award, or have filed in Court a notice in writing that they cannot agree.\n\n## Revocation of authority.\n\n221. The authority of an arbitrator or umpire is not revocable except by the Court.\n\n## Special case.\n\n222. Where it appears to the arbitrators or umpire that any difficult question of law is involved in or raised by the facts as finally ascertained by them or him, they or he may, if it seems fit, state the award (as to the whole or any part thereof) in the form of a special case for the opinion of the Court having jurisdiction in the matter or of the Supreme Court.\n\nThe Court shall consider and deliver judgment on such case, and shall be at liberty to draw inferences of fact from the facts stated, and to amend the case or remit it for amendment by reason of any irregularity, mistake, or imperfection.\n\n## Costs.\n\n223. The arbitrators or umpire shall have power to award how the costs of the reference shall be borne, in the whole or in part; but any award as to costs shall not preclude the party or parties against whom costs are awarded from applying to the Court to tax the costs; and on such application the costs, including the remuneration (if any) of the arbitrators and umpire, or any of them, shall be taxed at a reasonable rate by the Court, and the Court shall make such order regarding the costs of taxation as justice requires.\n\n## Form and contents of award.\n\n224. Every award must be in writing signed by the arbitrators or umpire making the same.\n\nIt must contain a conclusive finding, and may not find on the contingency of any matter of fact being afterwards substantiated or deposed to.\n\nIt must comprehend a finding on each of the several matters referred.\n\nArbitrators or an umpire may, however, from time to time make several awards on several parts of a matter or on several matters referred, so as the latest of the awards is made within the time limited.\n\n## Deposit of award.\n\n225. The arbitrators or umpire making an award shall within the time limited deposit the award in the Court, enclosed in a sealed envelope, and indorsed with the names of the parties to \n\n125",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 263867,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "page_number": 141,
        "title": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "content_text": "80 \n\nbusiness of the Court permits, or otherwise on some adjournment day, of which you will receive no further notice.\n\nYou are desired to pay attention to the following directions:- If the Plaintiff fails to attend in person or by counsel or attorney on the day appointed, the case if called on may be struck out, and the Plaintiff will be liable to pay to the Defendant such costs as may be fixed by the Court. Also, the case must be got down in the General Hearing List afresh, by which the Plaintiff will incur delay and expense.\n\nIf the Defendant fails to attend in person or by counsel or attorney on the day appointed, the case if called on may, if the Court so directs, be heard and determined in his absence on the evidence adduced on behalf of the Plaintiff, and the Court will issue execution on the judgment so obtained.\n\nIf either party has any application to make to the Court to postpone the hearing, it should be made as soon as possible, on application for a summons for that purpose, and if the application is based on any matter of fact, as the absence of a material witness, or the like, the facts relied on must be set out and verified in one or more affidavit or affidavits filed in the Court before such application.\n\nIf either party considers that the questions between the parties are not fairly raised or put in issue by the pleadings, or thinks that the questions raised are obscure, and that he is prejudiced thereby, he may apply to the Court on summons to settle issues, and such application should be made at once.\n\nThe parties are warned that at the hearing they are required to adduce all the testimony, written and oral, which each of them desires to rely on, in support of his own case and in contradiction of that of his opponent. The proof will be required at the hearing and not on a subsequent day, and parties failing to bring their testimony forward at the proper time may find themselves absolutely precluded from adducing it at all, or at best only allowed to do so on payment of substantial costs to the other side, and on such other terms as the Court thinks fit to impose.\n\nParties desirous to enforce the attendance of witnesses should apply at once to the Court to issue to or to procure from the national authority of the witness required a summons for his attendance.\n\nIt is indispensable that the application should be made so as to allow time for a reasonable notice to the witness required.\n\nIf the witness is required to bring books or papers, they must be particularized in the summons sufficiently to enable him clearly to understand what is meant.\n\nAny party summoning a witness through the Court, thereby becomes liable to pay such witness a reasonable sum of money to be summarily fixed by the Court for his expenses and loss of time.\n\nThe Court will not enforce the attendance of a witness unless such sum has been deposited in the Court.\n\nIf either party desires to use in evidence at the hearing any book, paper, or document in the possession or power of the other party he must give the other party reasonable notice in writing to produce it \n\n81 \n\nat the hearing, failing which he will not be allowed to give any secondary evidence of its contents.\n\nNo person is excluded from giving evidence by reason of interest or relationship. The parties themselves, their wives, relations, partners, and servants respectively are competent witnesses.\n\n(Seal.)\n\n8. \n## Motion Paper\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton]\n\nBetween **A.B.** Plaintiff\nand **C.D.** Defendant\n\nThe Plaintiff [or as the case may be] moves that [here state the terms of the motion].\n\n9. \n## Affidavit of Attesting Witness in Proof of the Due Execution of a Will or Codicil Dated After 31st December 1837\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton]\n\nIn the matter of **A.B. deceased**. I, **C.D.** of [address], make oath and say that I am one of the subscribing witnesses to the last Will [or Codicil, as the case may be,] of **A.B.**, late of [address], deceased, the said Will [or Codicil] being now hereto annexed, bearing date [date], and that the testator executed the said Will [or Codicil] on the day of the date thereof, by signing his name at the foot or end thereof [or in the testimonium clause thereof, or in the attestation clause thereto, as the case may be], as the same now appears thereon, (1) in the presence of me and of [other witness], the other subscribed witness thereto, both of us being present at the same time, and we thereupon attested and subscribed the said Will [or Codicil] in the presence of the testator.\n\nSworn at [place] this [day] day of [month], 18[year] before me,\n\n**XX**  \n**C.D.** \n\n11351.  \nF  \n139",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 263868,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "page_number": 142,
        "title": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "content_text": "## 10.\n\n\n## 82 \n## 83 \n\n### Oath for Executor \n\n(1) Insert besides \"In Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton]\" the name, &c., of the deponent, his relationship, if any, to the testator.\n\nIn the matter of A.B. deceased. I, C.D. of (1) make oath and say that I believe the paper writing [or the paper writings] hereto annexed and marked (2) to contain the true and original last Will [or last Will with Codicils] of A.B. late of , deceased, and that I am the sole executor [or one of the executors] therein named [or executor according to the tenour thereof, executor during life, executrix during widowhood, or as the case may be], and that I will faithfully administer the personal property of the testator by paying his just debts and the legacies given by his Will [or Will and Codicils], so far as his personal property shall extend and the law bind me; that I will exhibit an inventory, and render an account of my executorship, whenever lawfully required; that the testator died at on the day of 18 ; that at the time of his death he had his fixed place of abode at within the jurisdiction of this Court; and that the whole of his personal property does not amount in value to the sum of , to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.\n\nSworn at this day of 18 , before me, E.F. C.D.\n\n(*) Each testamentary paper is to be marked by the persons sworn and the person administering the oath. Where more executors than one are appointed, and all are not sworn, a memorandum should be made in the margin of the oath that power is to be reserved to the other executor or executors.\n\n### Oath for Administrator (not with Will annexed)\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton]. In the matter of A.B. deceased, I, C.D. of make oath and say that A.B., late of deceased, died intestate, a bachelor, without parent, brother or sister, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, and that I am his lawful cousin german and one of his next of kin [this must be altered in accordance with the circumstances of the case]; that I will faithfully administer the personal property of the deceased, by paying his just debts, and distributing the residue of his property according to law; that I will exhibit an inventory and render an account of my administration whenever lawfully required; that the deceased died at on the day of 18 ; that at the time of his death he had his fixed place of abode at within the jurisdiction of this Court; and that the whole of his personal property does not amount in value to the sum of , to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.\n\nC.D.\n\n(1) Each testamentary paper is to be marked by the persons sworn and the person administering the oath.\n\n### Oath for Administrator with Will annexed\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton]. In the matter of A.B. deceased. I, C.D. of make oath and say that I believe the paper writing [or the paper writings] hereto annexed, and marked by me (2) to contain the true and original last Will [or last Will with Codicils] of A.B., late of , deceased; that the executor therein named is dead without having taken probate thereof [or as the fact may be]; that I am the residuary legatee in trust named therein [or as the fact may be, stating the relationship, if any, of the deponent to the testator]; that I will faithfully administer the personal property of the testator, by paying his just debts and the legacies given by his Will [or Will and Codicils], so far as his personal property shall extend and the law bind me, and distributing the residue of his personal property according to law; that I will exhibit an inventory and render an account of my administration whenever lawfully required; that the testator died at , on the day of 18 ; that at the time of his death he had his fixed place of abode at within the jurisdiction of this Court; and \n\nSworn at this day of 18 , before me, E.F.\n\n### Probate\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton]. Be it known, that on the day of 18 the last Will [or the last Will with Codicils] (a copy whereof is hereto annexed) of A.B., late of deceased, who died on at and who at the time of his death had his fixed place of abode at within the jurisdiction of this Court, was proved and registered in this Court; and that the administration of the personal property of the said deceased was granted by this Court to C.D., the sole executor [or as the case may be] named in the said Will, he having been first duly sworn.\n\nE.F., H.B.M. Consul at [Canton].\n\n(Seal.)\n\nTo be written in margin: Sworn under ... on or about the day of ... \n## 140 \n## F 2",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 263869,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "page_number": 143,
        "title": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "content_text": "## 14. Letters of Administration with Will annexed.\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton].\n\nBe it known, that A.B., late of , who died on the day of , 18 , at , and who had at the time of his death his fixed place of abode at , within the jurisdiction of this Court, made and duly executed his last Will [or his last Will with Codicils thereto], and did therein name [according to the facts]  executors.\n\nAnd be it further known, that on the  day of , 18 , Letters of Administration with the said Will [and Codicils] annexed of the personal property of the deceased were granted by this Court to C.D. [insert the character in which the grant is taken], he having been first duly sworn.\n\nXI  \nH. B. M. Consul at [Canton].  \n(Seal.)\n\n## 15. Letters of Administration (not with Will annexed).\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton].\n\nBe it known, that on the day of , 18 , Letters of Administration of the personal property of A.B., late of , deceased, who died on , intestate, and who had at the time of his death his fixed place of abode at , within the jurisdiction of this Court, were granted by this Court to C.D., of , the widow [or as the case may be] of the said intestate, she having been first duly sworn.\n\nXX  \nH. B. M. Consul at [Canton].  \n(Seal.)\n\n## 16. Double Probate.\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Cunton].\n\nBe it known, that on the day of , 18 , the last Will [with Codicils] of A.B., late of , deceased, who died on , and who at the time of his death had his fixed place of abode at , within the jurisdiction of this Court, was proved and registered in this Court, and that administration of his personal property, and any way concerning his Will, was granted by this Court to C.D., one of the executors named in the said Will [or Codicil], he having been first duly sworn, power being reserved of making the like grant to E.F., the other executor named in the said Will. And be it further known, that on the day of , 18 , the said Will of the said deceased was also proved in this Court, and that the like administration was granted by this Court to the said E.F., he having been first duly sworn.\n\nXE  \nH. B. M. Consul at [Canton].  \n(Seal.)\n\n## Letters of Administration de Bonis non.\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at [Canton].\n\nBe it known, that A.B., late of , deceased, died on , intestate, and had at the time of his death his fixed place of abode at , within the jurisdiction of this Court, and that since his death, namely, on the day of , 18 , Letters of Administration of his personal property were granted by this Court to C.D. [insert the relationship or character of administrator] (which Letters of Administration now remain on record in this Court) who, after taking such Administration upon him, partly administered the personal property of the deceased, and afterwards, namely, on , died, leaving part thereof unadministered, and that on the day of , 18 , Letters of Administration of the personal property so left unadministered were granted by this Court to , he having been first duly sworn.\n\nXF  \nH. B. M. Consul at [Canton].  \n(Seal.)\n\n## Administration Bond.\n\nKnow all men by these presents, that we, A.B. of , C.D. of , and E.F. of  are jointly and severally bound unto G.H., the Judge of Her Britannic Majesty's Supreme Court for China and , in the sum of , to be paid to the said G.H., his executors, administrators, or assigns, for which payment well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, and each of us, for the whole, our and each of our heirs, executors, and administrators, firmly by these presents.\n\nSworn under  on the  day of , 18 .  \nand that the Testator died on or about the  day of , 18 .  \nand that the Intestate died on or about the  day of , 18 .",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 263870,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "page_number": 144,
        "title": "CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865",
        "content_text": "Japan, in the sum of 96 to be paid to the said G.H. or the Judge of the said Court for the time being; for which payment we bind ourselves and each of us, for the whole, our and each of our heirs, executors, and administrators, firmly by these presents. Sealed with our seals. Dated the day of 18.\n\nA.B. (L.S.)  \nC.D. (L.S.)  \nE.F. (L.S.)\n\nThe condition of the above-written obligation is such, that if the above-named A.B., the intended Administrator of the personal property of I.J., late of ..., deceased, who died on the day of ..., do make a true and perfect inventory of the personal property of the deceased so left unadministered, which has or shall come into his possession, or into the possession of any person for him, and the same so made do exhibit into Her Britannic Majesty's Supreme Court or Her Britannic Majesty's Court at Canton, whenever required by law so to do; and the same personal property, and all other the personal property of the deceased, which shall at any time after the making and exhibition of such inventory, come into the possession of the said A.B. or of any person for him, do well and truly administer according to law; (that is to say,) do pay the debts which the deceased owed at his death, and all the residue of the said personal property do deliver and pay to such person or persons as shall be entitled thereto under the Act of Parliament intituled \"An Act for the better settling of Intestates' Estates\"; and further do make a true and just account of his administration whenever lawfully required; and in case it shall hereafter appear that any Will was made by the deceased, and the executor or executors therein named do exhibit the same for probate, then if the said A.B., being thereunto required, do duly render and deliver up the Letters of Administration granted to him, then this obligation shall be void, and otherwise shall remain in full force.\n\nSigned, sealed, and delivered before this Court.  \n(Seal.)\n\n## 19. Administration Bond for Administrators with Will annexed\n\nKnow all men by these presents, that we, A.B. of ..., C.D. of ..., and E.F. of ... are jointly and severally bound unto G.H., the Judge of Her Britannic Majesty's Supreme Court for China and Japan in the sum of 87 to be paid to the said G.H. or the Judge of the said Court for the time being, for which payment we bind ourselves and each of us, for the whole, our and each of our heirs, executors, and administrators, firmly by these presents. Sealed with our seals. Dated the day of 18.\n\nA.B. (L.S.)  \nC.D. (L.S.)  \nE.F. (L.S.)\n\nThe condition of the above-written obligation is such that if the above-named A.B., the intended Administrator with Will annexed of the personal property of I.J., late of ..., deceased, who died on the day of ..., do make a true and perfect inventory of the personal property of the deceased, left unadministered by ..., which has or shall come into his possession, or into the possession of any person for him, and the same so made do exhibit into Her Britannic Majesty's Supreme Court or Her Britannic Majesty's Court at Canton, whenever required by law so to do, and the same personal property so left unadministered and all other the personal property of the deceased which shall at any time after the making and exhibition of such inventory come into the possession of the said A.B. or of any person for him, do well and truly administer, (that is to say,) do pay the debts which the deceased owed at his death, and the legacies given by the said Will annexed to the said Letters of Administration as far as such personal property will extend, and the law bind him, and all the residue of the said personal property shall deliver and pay unto such person or persons as shall be by law entitled thereto, and further do make a true and just account of his said Administration whenever lawfully required, then this obligation shall be void, and otherwise shall remain in full force.\n\nSigned, sealed, and delivered before this Court.  \n(Seal.)\n\n## 20. Declaration of the Personal Property of a Testator or an Intestate\n\nIn Her Britannic Majesty's Court at Canton.\n\n2. A true declaration of all the personal property of A.B., late of ..., and had at the time of his death his fixed place of abode at ..., within the jurisdiction of this Court, which have at any time since his death come to the possession, or knowledge of C.D., the administrator with the Will annexed of the said A.B. [or administrator, as the case may be], made and exhibited upon and by virtue of the oath [or solemn affirmation] of the said C.D. as follows:\n\nFirst, I declare that the deceased was at the time of his death possessed of or entitled to ...\n\n[The details of the deceased's property must be here inserted, and the value inserted opposite to each particular.]",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-109 - Public Offices - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 264451,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-110 - Others - 1865",
        "page_number": 367,
        "title": "CO129-110 - Others - 1865",
        "content_text": "## expected to understand\" Probat he must \n\n\"can be \n\ne \n\ninformation \n\ncan be had at the Colonial Office\" If you could kindly \n\ninform me \n\na \n\nas to this, in fact what \n\nWill made in England according \n\nher Laws will pass Property at Hong \n\nI shall be much obliged. \n\nI have the Honor to remain, \n\nYour obt Servt \n\nRadler May \n\nis a hi \n\nresponsibility \n\n26697 \n\nAll property. \n\nHongkong \n\nSir Roger \n\nAxtundham \n\n11½ 186. \n\n8 \n\nlease \n\nand the law of England \n\nwas Established as \n\nthe law of the \n\nColony \n\nshortly \n\nafter its \n\nfoundation \n\nWhen he is and that he shall in \n\nWill him to call han \n\nher prof him my assistant \n\nI din anus \n\nI make \n\nin 1844. \n\nTitle in \n\nBut there is a Registration \n\nHongkong \n\nso that after \n\ntestator's death the will must be registered in the Colony to give \n\nSee Ordinance \n\n3277 1844. \n\nit effect\". MR \n\nthe",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-110 - Others - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 264453,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-110 - Others - 1865",
        "page_number": 369,
        "title": "CO129-110 - Others - 1865",
        "content_text": "Providing for the Registration of Deeds, & Wills affecting real or immoveable Property in Hongkong, so that after the death of a testator possessed of property in the Colony it would probably be necessary to register his will in the Colony for the purpose of giving it effect.\n\nYou will understand that the latter part of this letter is intended as a suggestion to be further examined and we will send a copy of this letter to the Librarian of this Dept. Any person you may depute will be permitted to examine the Laws effective during Hongkong Law Officers. The points to which you refer, and which you will be enabled to form conclusions from that examination. \n\nPage 364",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-110 - Others - 1865.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 293491,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-167 - Sir Kennedy - 1874 [1-8]",
        "page_number": 151,
        "title": "CO129-167 - Sir Kennedy - 1874 [1-8]",
        "content_text": "## \nIn all probability, since the recent establishment of the Office, I have myself had to advise the payment of trust estates into the hands of the Official Trustee. Five of them, that of Mr. Kg. Sage being sworn to be of the value of $30,000 and another being not much less in amount, have been taken to that end. A glance at the calendars of Probates granted during the last five years shows that this has now reached a period in which estates of considerable magnitude are annually brought up for probate. Many of them have been left by Chinese who have amassed fortunes here, and there is good reason to anticipate that when testators of this class come to understand the benefit of the security afforded by the Office to the fortunes in question, to the benefit of their wives and children, they will largely avail themselves of it.\n\nThe responsibility of the Office itself is one of peculiar trust. To make the best of the estates in his charge for the benefit of the residuary trustees without...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-167 - Sir Kennedy - 1874 [1-8].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 299836,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-177 - Sir Kennedy Acting Governor Austin Lieut Governor Hennessy - 1877 [1-5]",
        "page_number": 166,
        "title": "CO129-177 - Sir Kennedy Acting Governor Austin Lieut Governor Hennessy - 1877 [1-5]",
        "content_text": "there extracts\n\nrefer\n\nite\n\ncase of a Junk whil\n\narmed men who landed, on the island of Hoi-shing from\n\nwas purged\n\nChinese\n\n4\n\nResene Conser,\n\nConser, enst\n\nLontent\n\nof Hong Kong\n\nRear\n\nCa pa\n\nAgenhav\n\nand having hauled. The me of the\n\njunk off the shore in order to prevent collisions of tations.\n\nto Cont\n\nThe full particulars\n\nof this case have 22th Yah\n\n2 stopher-wr\n\nKan\n\n7 Can not saw the tipple of the letter. \"H\n\nX\n\nappears\n\nSed hanction\n\nchinest\n\na disrespect to the dignity\n\nof the Hong Kong\n\nI\n\nPay for 64\n\nLasting\n\nApparently\n\nbeen decirl in this\n\ndepartment, Lond\n\nFunsti that the affair will be concluded but Hoi-shing Carnaum has obscure\n\nΛ\n\nwith refect. That the [mon\n\nin writing to the Thinere Views\n\nwouth\n\nAffency & hair described to high handed violation\n\noff this\n\nNo Zim\n\nThis Wilish tersity in no\n\nLanguage Thats ass\n\nCestator of Bacters tending to the dignity of the\n\nGwernment\".\n\nThought it were only u.\n\nBatter\n\n7\n\nCtomal\n\n164\n\ncose cams, instead of the port.\n\nLivet\n\nof more ducity\n\nthat \"fume laughge\n\nwas not wajah of the when the complain selam Comed\n\nflagrant\n\nflanz\n\nan intrage\n\nJan\n\nAfter re-examining the text and following the instructions, here is the corrected version in HTML format:\n\nThere extracts\n\nRefer\n\nIt e\n\ncase of a Junk while\n\narmed men who landed on the island of Hoi-shing from\n\n...\n\nChinese\n\n4\n\nResene Conser,\n\nConser, enst\n\nContent\n\nof Hong Kong\n\nRear\n\nCaptain\n\nAgent Hav\n\nand having hauled. The men of the\n\njunk off the shore in order to prevent collisions or irritations.\n\nto Cont\n\nThe full particulars\n\nof this case have been sent to Yah\n\n2 stopher-wr\n\nKan\n\n7 Cannot saw the triple of the letter. \"H\n\nX\n\nappears\n\nSevere sanction\n\nChinese\n\na disrespect to the dignity\n\nof the Hong Kong\n\nI\n\nPay for 64\n\nLasting\n\nApparently\n\nbeen decided in this\n\ndepartment, Lord\n\nFunsti that the affair will be concluded but Hoi-shing Carnaum has obscured\n\nwith respect. That the [matter]\n\nin writing to the Chinese Views\n\nwould\n\nAgency & hair described to high-handed violation\n\nof this\n\nNo Zimm\n\nThis Welsh tersity in no\n\nLanguage that's a\n\nCestator of Bacters tending to the dignity of the\n\nGovernment\".\n\nThough it were only u.\n\nBetter\n\n7\n\nCtomal\n\n164\n\nclose cams, instead of the port.\n\nLivet\n\nof more duchy\n\nthat \"fume language\n\nwas not worthy of the when the complainant sent Comed\n\nflagrant\n\nflanz\n\nan intrage\n\nJan\n\nHowever, to follow the exact format as requested:\n\nthere extracts\n\nrefer\n\nite\n\ncase of a Junk while\n\narmed men who landed, on the island of Hoi-shing from\n\nwas purged\n\nChinese\n\n4\n\nResene Conser,\n\nConser, enst\n\nContent\n\nof Hong Kong\n\nRear\n\nCaptain\n\nAgent Hav\n\nand having hauled. The men of the\n\njunk off the shore in order to prevent collisions of irritations.\n\nto Cont\n\nThe full particulars\n\nof this case have 22th Yah\n\n2 stopher-wr\n\nKan\n\n7 Can not saw the triple of the letter. \"H\n\nX\n\nappears\n\nSevere sanction\n\nChinese\n\na disrespect to the dignity\n\nof the Hong Kong\n\nPay for 64\n\nLasting\n\nApparently\n\nbeen decided in this\n\ndepartment, Lord\n\nFun sti that the affair will be concluded but Hoi-shing Carnaum has obscure\n\nwith respect. That the [matter]\n\nin writing to the Chinese Views\n\nwould\n\nAgency & hair described to high-handed violation\n\nof this\n\nNo Zim\n\nThis Welsh tersity in no\n\nLanguage that's a\n\nCestator of Bacters tending to the dignity of the\n\nGovernment\".\n\nThough it were only u.\n\nBetter\n\n7\n\nCtomal\n\n164\n\nclose cams, instead of the port.\n\nLivet\n\nof more duchy\n\nthat \"fume language\n\nwas not worthy of the when the complainant sent Comed\n\nflagrant\n\nflanz\n\nan intrage\n\nJan\n\nLet me reformat it according to the rules.\n\nThere are extracts referring to the case of a junk while armed men who landed on the island of Hoi-shing from ...\n\nChinese 4\n\nResene Conser, Conser, enst Content of Hong Kong Rear Captain Agent Hav and having hauled. The men of the junk off the shore in order to prevent collisions or irritations.\n\nTo Cont\n\nThe full particulars of this case have been sent to Yah\n\n2 stopher-wr Kan\n\n7 Cannot saw the triple of the letter. \"H X appears Severe sanction Chinese a disrespect to the dignity of the Hong Kong\n\nPay for 64 Lasting Apparently been decided in this department, Lord\n\nFun sti that the affair will be concluded but Hoi-shing Carnaum has obscured with respect. That the [matter] in writing to the Chinese Views would\n\nAgency & hair described to high-handed violation of this\n\nNo Zim This Welsh tersity in no Language that's a Cestator of Bacters tending to the dignity of the Government\".\n\nThough it were only u. Better 7 Ctomal 164 close cams, instead of the port.\n\nLivet of more duchy that \"fume language was not worthy of the when the complainant sent Comed flagrant flanz an intrage Jan\n\nHere is the final version:\n\nThere are extracts referring to the case of a junk while armed men who landed on the island of Hoi-shing from ...\n\nChinese 4\n\nResene Conser, Conser, enst Content of Hong Kong Rear Captain Agent Hav and having hauled. The men of the junk off the shore in order to prevent collisions or irritations.\n\nTo Cont\n\nThe full particulars of this case have been sent to Yah\n\n2 stopher-wr Kan 7 Cannot saw the triple of the letter.\n\n\"H X appears Severe sanction Chinese a disrespect to the dignity of the Hong Kong\n\nPay for 64 Lasting Apparently been decided in this department, Lord\n\nFun sti that the affair will be concluded but Hoi-shing Carnaum has obscured with respect.\n\nThat the [matter] in writing to the Chinese Views would Agency & hair described to high-handed violation of this\n\nNo Zim This Welsh tersity in no Language that's a Cestator of Bacters tending to the dignity of the Government\".\n\nThough it were only u. Better 7 Ctomal 164 close cams, instead of the port.\n\nLivet of more duchy that \"fume language was not worthy of the when the complainant sent Comed flagrant flanz an intrage Jan",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-177 - Sir Kennedy Acting Governor Austin Lieut Governor Hennessy - 1877 [1-5].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 304181,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-185 - Acting Governor Marsh Governor Hennessy - 1879 [6-12]",
        "page_number": 126,
        "title": "CO129-185 - Acting Governor Marsh Governor Hennessy - 1879 [6-12]",
        "content_text": "# No. 9 of 1870\n\n## An Ordinance enacted by the Governor of Hongkong, with the Advice of the Legislative Council thereof, to amend Ordinance No. 8 of 1860, and to make further Provision in relation to the Administration of the Estate and Effects of Deceased Persons.\n\n[19th August, 1870.]\n\n## Preamble\n\nWHEREAS it is expedient to amend Ordinance No. 8 of 1860, and to make further Provision in relation to the Administration of the Estate and Effects of Deceased Persons: Be it enacted by the Governor of Hongkong, with the Advice of the Legislative Council thereof, as follows:\n\nI. It is hereby declared that the Registrar of the Supreme Court is \"Ex-Officio\" **Official Administrator** under Ordinance No. 8 of 1860.\n\nII. In the Administration of the Estate of every Person who shall die after the passing of this Ordinance, no Debt or Liability of such Person shall be entitled to any Priority or Preference by Reason merely that the same is secured by or arises under a Bond, Deed, or other Instrument under Seal, or is otherwise made or constituted a Specialty Debt; but all the Creditors of such Person, as well Specialty as Simple Contract, shall be treated as standing in equal Degree, and be paid accordingly out of the Assets of such Deceased Person, whether such Assets are Legal or Equitable, any other Law to the contrary notwithstanding: Provided always, that this Ordinance shall not prejudice or affect any Lien, Charge, or other Security which any Creditor may hold or be entitled to for the Payment of his Debt.\n\nIII. Any Executor or Administrator may apply by Summary Petition to the Supreme Court, for an Order limiting the Time for Creditors and others to send in their Claims against the Estate of the Testator or Intestate and specifying what Notices are to be given of the making of such Order, and of the Time thereby limited; and where an Executor or Administrator shall have given the Notices specified in such Order, he shall at the Expiration of the Time limited thereby for sending in such Claims, be at Liberty to distribute the Assets of the Testator or Intestate or any Part thereof, amongst the Parties entitled thereto, having Regard to the Claims of which such Executor or Administrator has then Notice, and shall not be liable for the Assets or any Part thereof, so distributed to any Person of whose Claim such Executor or Administrator shall not have had Notice at the Time of Distribution of the said Assets or a Part thereof, as the Case may be; but nothing in this Section contained shall prejudice the Right of any Creditor or Claimant to follow the Assets or any Part thereof, into the Hands of the Persons who may have received the same respectively.\n\nIV. It shall be lawful for the **Official Administrator**, whenever he shall think it expedient so to do and upon such Evidence of Death as he shall deem sufficient, to take Possession of the private Papers, Monies, Goods, Chattels and other moveable Property of any Deceased Person whatsoever which shall be found within the Colony and to provide for the safe Custody thereof, until Grant of Probate of the Will of such deceased Person or Letters of Administration of his Estate and Effects shall have been granted by the Supreme Court: Provided always that the Official Administrator may, in lieu thereof, if he shall think fit, issue forthwith a Commission of Appraisement of the said Property.\n\nV. Any Person who shall without lawful Authority or Excuse remove or attempt to remove out of the Colony any such Property of a Deceased Person shall be liable to a Penalty.\n\n## Rules of Evidence to be observed as at common Law.\n\nXVI. The **Rules of Evidence** observed in the Supreme Court in its Common Law Jurisdiction shall be applicable to and observed in the Trial of all Questions of Fact in the said Court in its Probate Jurisdiction.\n\nXVII. It shall be lawful for the said Court to cause any Question of Fact arising in any Suit or Proceeding under this Ordinance to be tried by a Special or Common Jury upon the application of any Party or Parties to the Proceeding made in that behalf.\n\nXVIII. When the Court shall order a Question of Fact to be tried by a Jury, the Court may make all such Rules and Orders upon the Sheriff or any other Person for procuring the Attendance of a Special or Common Jury for the Trial of such Question as may now be made by the Supreme Court in its Common Law Jurisdiction, and may also make any other Orders which to such Court may seem requisite: And every such Jury shall be struck, summoned, ballotted for, and called in like manner as if such Jury were a Jury for the Trial of any cause in the said Supreme Court in its Common Law Jurisdiction; and every Juryman so summoned shall be entitled to the same Rights, and subject to the same Duties and Liabilities, as if he had been duly summoned for the Trial of any such Cause in the said Supreme Court and every Party to any such Proceeding shall be entitled to the same Rights as to Challenge and otherwise as if he were a Party to any such Cause.\n\nXIX. When any such Question shall be so ordered to be tried by a Jury before the Court itself, such Question shall be reduced into Writing in such Form as the Court shall direct, and at the Trial the Jury shall be impanelled to try the said Question, and a true Verdict to give thereon according to the Evidence and upon every such Trial the Court shall have the same Powers, Jurisdiction, and Authority as belong to the said Judge of the said Supreme Court sitting at Nisi Prius.\n\n## Powers of the Court\n\nXX. It shall be lawful for the Judge of the said Court for the Time being to sit in Chambers for the dispatch of such Business of the said Court under this Ordinance as can, in the opinion of the said Judge with Advantage to the Suitors, be heard in Chambers: And the Times at which such Sittings shall be held shall from Time to Time be fixed by the Judge. Provided always that no Questions shall be heard in Chambers which either Party shall require to be heard in open Court.\n\nXXI. The Judge of the said Court when so sitting in Chambers shall have and exercise the same Power and Jurisdiction in respect of the Business to be brought before him as if sitting in open Court.\n\n## Caveats\n\nXXII. **Caveats** against the Grant of Probates or Administration may be lodged in the Registry of the said Court in its Probate Jurisdiction and (subject to any Rules or Orders under this Ordinance) the Practice and Procedure under such Caveats in the Court of Probate shall as near as may be, correspond with the Practice and Procedure under Caveats heretofore in use in the said Supreme Court in its Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction.\n\nXXIII. The Judge shall cause to be made from Time to Time in the Registry of the said Court in its Probate Jurisdiction, Calendars of the Grants of Probate and Administration therein for such Periods as the Judge may think fit, each such Calendar to contain a Note of every Probate or Administration with the Will annexed granted within the Period therein specified, and also a Note of every other Administration granted within the same Period, such respective Notes setting forth the Dates of such Grants the Names of the Testators and Intestates, the Place and Time of Death, the Names and Descriptions of the Executors and Administrators, and the Value of the Effects as set forth.\n\nPage 125\nPage 363 (REGE 20 DEC 79)",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-185 - Acting Governor Marsh Governor Hennessy - 1879 [6-12].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 304182,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-185 - Acting Governor Marsh Governor Hennessy - 1879 [6-12]",
        "page_number": 127,
        "title": "CO129-185 - Acting Governor Marsh Governor Hennessy - 1879 [6-12]",
        "content_text": "## AN ORDINANCE FOR REGULATING THE ADMINISTRATION OF INTESTATE ESTATES, AND FOR THE DISPOSAL OF UNCLAIMED BALANCES OF THE ESTATES OF PERSONS DYING INTESTATE WITHIN THE COLONY OF HONGKONG.\n\n**ORDINANCE NO. 8 OF 1870**\n\n### Sections I to VI\n\nNo Action shall be brought against any Person for anything done by him in relation to such Property under the Authority or in the Execution or intended Execution of the Powers vested in him by this Ordinance, but any Person who shall feel aggrieved thereby may apply for Redress to the Supreme Court in its Probate Jurisdiction by Summary Petition verified upon Oath or Declaration.\n\nAny Person who shall destroy, conceal or refuse to yield up such Property on Demand to the Official Administrator, shall be guilty of a Misdemeanor and shall be liable, on Summary Conviction thereof before a Magistrate, to a Fine not exceeding Five hundred Dollars with or without Imprisonment, not exceeding Six Months.\n\n## Sections VI to X\n\nVI. No Action shall be brought against the Official Administrator for anything done by him in relation to such Property under the Authority or in the Execution or intended Execution of the Powers vested in him by Section IV, but any Person who shall feel aggrieved thereby may apply for Redress to the Supreme Court in its Probate Jurisdiction by Summary Petition verified upon Oath or Declaration and upon the Hearing of such Petition in Court or in Chambers, and whether in Vacation or not, the said Court may take such Evidence as it shall think fit, and may make Order in relation to such Property which the Justice of the Case requires.\n\nVII. The Official Administrator shall have a Lien upon all such Property for the reasonable Expenses incurred by him in respect thereof in carrying out the Provisions of Section IV, and such Expenses shall also constitute a primary Charge on the Estate of the Deceased.\n\nVIII. When any Person shall die leaving a Will within the Colony, the Person in whose keeping it shall have been deposited or who shall find such Will after the Testator's Death, shall produce and if required shall deliver the same to the Official Administrator within Fourteen Days of the Death of the Testator or of the Time when he shall have had Notice thereof, or from the Time of the finding of the Will, as the Case may be, and any Person who shall fail to comply with the Provisions of this Section shall be guilty of a Misdemeanor and shall be liable upon Summary Conviction thereof, to a Fine not exceeding Five hundred Dollars.\n\nIX. Whenever any Person being a Native of China shall die Intestate leaving Property within the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and it shall be necessary to obtain Proof of the Law of China for the Purpose of regulating the Administration of the Property of such deceased Person according to the Law of his Domicil, it shall be lawful for the Supreme Court, in its Discretion, to receive in Evidence any written Statement of the Law of China, which shall be certified by any British Consul in China under his Official Seal to have been obtained by him from the Chinese Government for the Purposes of such Administration, and with Reference to the Facts of the particular Case under Consideration.\n\nX. The Chief Justice may, from Time to Time, frame General Rules or Orders to be approved by the Legislative Council, for the following Purposes, and with the like Approval, may rescind or vary the same:\n| Purpose |\n| --- |\n| 1. For regulating the Practice and Procedure of the Supreme Court, and the several Forms of Petitions, Orders, and other Proceedings to be used in the Court in its Probate Jurisdiction. |\n| 2. For regulating the Duties of the various Officers of the Supreme Court, in its Probate Jurisdiction. |\n| 3. For regulating the Fees payable and the Charges and Costs to be allowed with Respect to all Proceedings before the Supreme Court, in its Probate Jurisdiction. |\n| 4. For reprinting the Filing, Custody, and Inspection of Records, and generally for carrying the Provisions of Ordinance No. 8 of 1860, and of this Ordinance into Effect. |\n\nXI. If any Case should arise which shall not have been expressly provided for by the General Rules or Orders to be made in Pursuance of the last preceding Section, but for which Provision has been made by the Rules or Orders for the Time being in Force in the Court of Probate in England, the Court may, in its Discretion, apply to such Case any of such last mentioned Rules and Orders, and until such General Rules and Orders shall have been made as aforesaid, the Court may direct that the Rules and Orders now in Force or which may hereafter be in Force in the Court of Probate in England or any Part thereof, and the Forms of Proceedings in Use therein, or any of them, subject to their Applicability and with such Modifications as the Circumstances require, shall be followed and adopted in the Supreme Court in its Probate Jurisdiction.\n\nXII. Nothing herein contained shall affect any other Remedy or Punishment which may now by Law exist for any Act done in Contravention of the Provisions of this Ordinance.\n\nPassed the Legislative Council of Hongkong, this 19th Day of August, 1870.\n\n## ANNO DECIMO OCTAVO VICTORIÆ REGINÆ. No. 6 of 1854.\n\n**AN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE DISPOSAL OF UNCLAIMED BALANCES OF THE ESTATES OF PERSONS DYING INTESTATE WITHIN THE COLONY OF HONGKONG.**\n\nBY the Honourable Lieutenant-Colonel WILLIAM CAINE, Lieutenant-Governor administering the Government of the Colony of Hongkong and its Dependencies, with the Advice of the Legislative Council of Hongkong.\n\n[31st October, 1854.]\n\nWHEREAS certain sums of money have been for many years past and now are lying in custody of the Officers in charge of the Public Treasure Vault of this Colony, which sums have been delivered to such custody by the Official Administrator of Intestate Estates as unclaimed Balances of certain such Estates, after full satisfaction according to scheme of division of all claims proved against such Estates, and in pursuance of the terms of `Ordinance No. 6 of 1845`; and whereas it is expedient to dispose of such sums of money for the public use and the benefit of this Colony :\n\nI. Be it therefore enacted and ordained by the Honorable the Lieutenant-Governor administering the Government of Hongkong, with the Advice of the Legislative Council thereof, that on the expiration of six years from the date of the decease of any Person dying Intestate, it shall be lawful for the Officer administering the Government of this Colony to direct the payment of the unclaimed Balance of such person's Estate into the hands of the Colonial Treasurer, for the general purposes of the Colony, or the transfer of such Balance to the Public Funds held by the officers in charge of the Treasure Vault, so that it may be rendered available for the public purposes of the Colony; Provided always that a certificate be given by the Official Administrator of Intestate Estates showing that due advertisement has been made for claims against such Estate, and for claims against such Balance of such Estate, and that, so far as is known to such Official Administrator, no further claim can reasonably be expected against such Balance of such Estate.\n\nII. And be it further enacted and ordained, that from and after the passing of this Ordinance all such Balances as have lain in the Treasure Vault of the Colony for a longer period than six years, shall and may be at once appropriated by the Officer administering the Government in manner aforesaid, after the production of the certificate of the Official Administrator of Intestate Estates to the effect above specified.\n\nIII. And be it further enacted and ordained, that at the expiration of the fifth year of such moneys remaining unclaimed, it shall be necessary for the Official Administrator to cause advertisements to be published both in this Colony and in the Mother Country of the deceased to the effect that if no claimant appear within twelve months to the funds in question, the Supreme Court of this Colony on motion made on that behalf by the Colonial Government will declare such funds confiscated for Colonial purposes, and that whether any claimant appear or not, the expenses attendant on such advertisements be deducted from the funds advertised.\n\nIV. And be it further enacted and ordained, that it shall be lawful for the Officer administering the Government in his discretion to direct that all or any unclaimed Balances as aforesaid at any time previous to the expiration of six years as aforesaid, be lodged in a chartered Bank within this Colony, at such rate of interest as may be procurable, and that the amount of such interest shall be added to, and considered portion of such unclaimed Balance as aforesaid.\n\nV. And be it further enacted and ordained, that this Ordinance shall not come into operation until Her Majesty's Pleasure shall be known with respect thereto.\n\nPassed the Legislative Council of Hongkong, this 31st Day of October, 1854.\n\nL. D'ALMADA & Castro,  \nClerk of Councils.\n\nW. CAINE.  \nPage 126  \n`(REGo 20 DFC 79)`",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-185 - Acting Governor Marsh Governor Hennessy - 1879 [6-12].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 334565,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-233 - Acting Governor Cameron - 1887 [6-8]",
        "page_number": 387,
        "title": "CO129-233 - Acting Governor Cameron - 1887 [6-8]",
        "content_text": "380\n\nCALENDAR OF PROBATES and ADMINISTRATIONS granted by the Supreme Court of Hongkong, during the year 1886,\n\nDate\nName of Testator or Intestate\nPlace and Time of Death\nGrant\nValue of the Effects\nName and Description of the Executor or Administrator\n\n1886\n\n$\n\nJan. 11\nAlexander Paterson\nEngland, 10th Mar., 1885\nProbate\n\nThomas Neave\n\n11\nNg Sa Yuen Sing Chun alias Yuen Cheong alias Yuen King Hung\nSingapore, 4th Mar., 1882\nAdm. with Will annexed\n\nHenry Arthur Herbert, Attorney of Frederick Paterson, Peter Rennie, and James Macalister\n\n11\nLeung Ming Yow alias Leung Fau Kan\n\n11\nLui Kum Chaen\n\nThomas Henderson Whitehead, Attorney of Grace Neave\n\nJune 15\nHenry O'Neill\nAt Sea, in the Bay of Bengal, 28th Jan., 1886\n\n900.00\n\n17\nChan Kom\n\n19\nHenry Brerall\nCanton, 8th Oct., 1885\nProbate\n7,000.00\nJohn Yardly Vernon, the executor\n\n19\nCheang Chew Inc\nH'kong, 13th Nov., 1885\n\nVernon Vernon, the executor. Power being reserved to Ellen O'Neil, the executrix\n\n21\nNg Shi\nH'kong, 21st Sept., 1885\nAdministration\n70,000.00\nChau Lai Po, the administrator\n\n22\nJaid Chan She\nShanghai, 20th April, 1886\nAdm. with Will annexed\n13,300.00\nAlfred Parker Stokes, Attorney of Elizabeth Everall and William Weston Clifford\n\nJuly\nJoseph Joseph Money\nH'kong, Both Mar., 1886\n\n530.00\n\n3\nWong Tso Leong\nH'kong, 30th April, 1886\nAdministration\n140.00\nCheang Chan She, the first lawful wife\n\n13\nWilliam Dolan\nH'kong, 3rd Dec., 1885\nProbate\n10.00\nWilliam Henry Hay, solo executor\n\n14\nAlbert Edward Salter\nH'kong, 10th Dec., 1885\nAdministration\n200.00\nEdw. James Ackroyd, Official Administrator\n\n14\nWong Tsung\nH'kong, 20th Dec., 1885\n\n21\nEdward Jackson\nManila\nProbate\n12,000.00\nDavid Gillies and Robert Lang, the executors\n\n21\nLeung Kong Chi alias Leung\n\n21\nNorman Curtis Stevens\nAt Sea, 13th June, 1886\nAdministration\n4,000.00\nAlfred Gascoyne Wise, Official Administrator\n\n22\nWong Ying\nH'kong, 22nd Jan., 1884\nProbate\n160.00\nWong Yuk Che, the executor, according to the tenor of the Will\n\n26\nLeung Kwan Shau alias Ki alias Kwong Fo\n\n200.00\n\n26\nAndrew Thomas Carmichael\n\nAdm. with Will annexed\n3,500.00\nAlfred Parker Stokes, Attorney of Ellen Maria Stevens\n\n27\nHurdil Singh\n\n27\nRobert Strachan\nCalcutta, 7th Jan., 1886\nProbate\n5,000.00\nHenry William Davis, Attorney of Isabel Braide Strachan, widow of the deceased\n\n28\nTo Shap Ng\nJamaica, 5th April, 1882\nAdm. with Will annexed\n1,000.00\nAlfred Parker Stokes, Attorney of Lucy Happer Glover\n\nAug.\nPhillip Robert Doni\n\n4\nAang. Reuben Solomon\nEngland, 19th Jan., 1881\nProbate\n2,500.00\nFrancis Bulkeley Johnson\n\n5\nLeong Hoi\nFrance, 20th Oct., 1884\nAdm. with Will annexed\n8,400.00\nJohn Walter, Attorney of Donald Peter McDonald and John Forrest\n\n7\nSitnah Solomon\nH'kong, 7th Dec., 1885\nAdministration\n600.00\nAlfred Gascoyne Wise, Official Administrator\n\n9\nJames Twinent\nAt Sea\nAdm. with Will annexed\n5,600.00\nSitnah Solomon, Attorney of Abraham Ezra\n\n10\nWilliam Whitfield\nLondon\n\n2,000.00\nWai Fing and Lim Wa You, the executor and executrix, according to the tenor of the Will\n\nSept.\nJarasjee Pestonjee Vakil\n\n8\nGeorge Doo Pitman\nS.S. Namna, 16th July, 1885\nAdministration\n100.00\nEdw. James Ackroyd, Official Administrator\n\n8\nLeung William Atah\nH'kong, 26th June, 1886\n\n9\nRobert Anderson\nH'kong, 7th Mar., 1885\nProbate\n22,700.00\nJohn Bell-Irving, Attorney of Sir Robert Jardine, Richard Dawes, Jr., and Jane Sophia Bulkeley Johnson\n\n10\nTsang I\nH'kong, 27th April, 1885\nAdministration\n100.00\nAlfred Gascoyne Wise, Official Administrator\n\n13\nGeorge Frederick Pinker\n\n41,000.00\n\n13\nWilliam Henry Doyle\n\n13\nChun Uang alias Chun Lok alias Chun Sang Lai alias Chun\n\n15\nAu Yun\nShui Shang, Macao\n\n16\nJoão Jacques Floriano Alvares\nMacao, 20th May, 1885\nProbate\n21,000.00\nAnna Maria Goines Alvares, the widow\n\n21\nLeung Yu Sha alias Leong Yee Sha\n\n24\nVicencia Maria d'Almeida\nH'kong, Macao\n\n27\nJohn Mitchell\nAt Sea, 24th Feb., 1886\nAdministration\n600.00\nAlfred Gascoyne Wise, Official Administrator\n\nOct.\nChau Mi Loi\nH'kong, 21st July, 1886\nAdm. de bonis non\n5,400.00\nAlfred Gascoyne Wise, Official Administrator\n\n1\nChing Fun\nH'kong, 5th Aug., 1886\nProbate\n10,000.00\nChing Fun, the executor\n\n1\nEuzebie Florentino de Souza\nH'kong, 2nd July, 1886\nAdministration\n2,500.00\nEuzebie Florentino de Souza, the administrator\n\n12\nJames Nelson\n\n12\nJohn McGourlay\n\n12\nLee Sik Chuen\nChow Chi Village\n\n16\nRobert Anderson\nH'kong, 16th Feb., 1886\nAdministration\n2,600.00\nEdw. James Ackroyd, Official Administrator\n\n18\nNg Mui\nH'kong, 24th Jan., 1886\nProbate\n\nWei Shee, the executrix, according to the tenor of the Will\n\n25\nNg Mui\nM'kong, 25th July, 1886\nAdministration\n2,900.00\nAndrew John Leach, Attorney of Anne Cecilia Doyle\n\n25\nTsang Sia\nH'kong, 12th Aug., 1886\n\n260.00\nAa Hin Kwong and Au Kum Sze\n\n25\nChoa Choo Bee\nH'kong, 18th Aug., 1886\nProbate\n4,500.00\nChoa Choo Bee, one of the executors. Power being reserved to Wong A-moong, the other executor\n\n26\nRev. John Charles Edge\nH'kong\n\n10,000.00\nSarah Ann Edge, widow of the deceased\n\n26\nChan Nam Hing\n\n300.00\nSham Shi, the lawful wife of the deceased\n\n26\nHippolyte Alexander Nicaise\nBrussels, 22nd Mar., 1885\nAdm. with Will annexed\n3,500.00\nThomas Henderson Whitehead, Attorney of Taucie Marie Caroline Nicaise, sole executrix\n\n27\nAntonio Sanches\n\n210,000.00\n\nNov.\nEleuterio Villanueva\nH'kong, 7th Oct., 1885\nAdministration\n30.00\nAlfred Gascoyne Wise, Official Administrator\n\n1\nLeung Ngau\n\n1\nChing Tai\n\n6\nJohn Gerrani\nH'kong, 25th Feb., 1886\nAdministration\n1,500.00\nIsmael Pullay Madar, one of the executors. Power being reserved to Wong Ha Pong, the other executor\n\n6\nLo A-kit\nTurriff, Scotland\n\nLo A-kit, the daughter\n\n8\nElias David Joseph Ezra\nAmoy, 22nd June, 1886\nAdm. with Will annexed\n3,500.00\nTse Ching Kai, the executor, according to the tenor of the Will\n\n8\nCharlotte Page Hance\nCalcutta, 3rd Feb., 1886\n\n3,000.00\nCharlotte Page Hance, the widow and sole executrix\n\n19\nHo Hing Fai\n\n22\nChan Tak alias Sui Fong\nTang Kun, 26th Nov., 1885\nAdm. with Will annexed\n\nDec.\nAnthony Field Sampson\n\nMay\nChoy Pun alias Choy Tun Po\nCanton, 13th Mar., 1886\nAdministration\n390.00\nChing A-tsai, the widow\n\n4\nTsui Kwong\nH'kong, 21st April, 1886\n\n10\nWong Lok Chi\nH'kong, 27th Nov., 1885\nProbate\n\nHerbert Maurice Bovis, Attorney of William Whyte\n\n14\nChing Yuk Shing\nAt Sea, H'kong\nAdministration\n\nChoy Tam Shi and Choy Wong Shi, the executrixes\n\n20\nAlbert Edmades Pirkie\nLondon, 17th July, 1885\nProbate\n70,800.00\nJohn Stewart Nazer, the executor\n\n20\nFrançois Vincevci\nH'kong, 11th Oct., 1880\nAdministration\n940.00\nLo Kwei Kum\n\n21\nJoseph Theophilus Chater\nH'kong\nAdm. with Will annexed\n500.00\nHon. Alfred Lister, Attorney of Stephen Wotton Bushell and Colin Mackenzie Ford\n\n21\nShmu A-feat\n\nShmu A-feat, first lawful wife\n\n21\nManoel José Maria Gonsalves da Silva\nMacao\n\n200.00\nWong Tin Ting, sole of the deceased\n\n21\nLa Lai bhang fong alias Lai Tung\nMacao\nAdministration\n\nLeung A-ol, the first lawful wife\n\n21\nNg A-mui\nH'kong\n\nMaria Francisca Marques da Silva\n\n26\nArthur Wellington Grosvenor\nEngland, 13th Oct., 1865\n\n125,000.00\nJacob Benjamin Elias, Attorney of Joseph Elias David Joseph Ezra\n\n28\nLow Kura Choong\n\n31\nWong A-sheong\n\nJune\nTaska Moto Odai\nSei Heung, 15th Feb., 1886\nAdministration\n2,300.00\nHe Kunn, otherwise Ho Sim To\n\n1\nYoung Ah Loy\nAt Sea, 7th May, 1886\n\nLam Kis Fung\n\n3\nKeung Lai Mool\nH'kong, 17th May, 1886\n\n100.00\nLai Kam and Lai Sai Kau, the executrixes\n\n3\nWong A-sai\nH'kong, 28th May, 1886\nAdministration\n150.00\nAuguste Raphael Marty, solo executor\n\nEdmund McLeod and George Bayne, the executors\n\nCatchick Paul Chater, sole executor\n\nProperty handed to Mr. Ewens, the Solicitor for Chan Choy, the mother of deceased\n\nYoung A-lai, the administratrix\n\nVictor Hobart Deacon, Attorney of Eliza Maria Grosvenor\n\nKeung Lai Mool, the lawful widow\n\nWong A-sai, sole of the deceased\n\nAlfred Gascoyne Wise, Official Administrator\n\n179,500.00\n\nALFRED G. WISE,\n\nActing Registrar.\n\nRegistry Supreme Court, Hongkong, 28th January, 1887.\n\nPage 380\n\nCALENDAR of PROBATES and ADMINISTRATIONS,—Continued.\n\n...\n\nPage 381",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-233 - Acting Governor Cameron - 1887 [6-8].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 346612,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-251 - Acting Governor Barker - 1891 [9-11]",
        "page_number": 216,
        "title": "CO129-251 - Acting Governor Barker - 1891 [9-11]",
        "content_text": "## MINUTE PAPER.\n\n213 \n\nFatten Muert \n\nOver and above the text of the Code Napoleon used in Mauritius; be on looking into is to give the children of the extra-marital union the status as regards inheritance of legitimacy.\n\nAt the original Code, I made some observations which work out a will when the testator marries. A good deal of a Henchman's property, in many homes unwithstood by (as he knew) by all children.\n\nI have suggested an amendment to the second paragraph to the draft so as to meet the different condition of this colony which seem to prevail.\n\n22.11.91 \n\nany part of it which remains subject to testamentary disposition not in the standing of a husband or parent will continue to be affected by a will made before marriage.\n\nI suspect that one great reason for deaths among people who live under the Code Napoleon is that they are always liable to be perfectly aware of its provisions as regards these personal rights.\n\n2-20th \n\n`$8.21/01` \n\nhis marriages under the law in Mauritius",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-251 - Acting Governor Barker - 1891 [9-11].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 350512,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892",
        "page_number": 179,
        "title": "CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892",
        "content_text": "# English law!! \n\nC.P.L. 28. Jam\n\nSay that the law of Hong Kong as to the validity and formalities of wills made in Hong Kong is the same as the law of England. The statutes dispose that a joint will is not valid.\n\nThat the will made by Captain Hemmersam and his wife having been executed and attested in Hong Kong is governed by the law of Hong Kong.\n\nMr. Lucas: 177 Dr. Schramayer is entirely wrong -- Assuming that the law in Hong Kong is the same as here, which is no doubt the case so far as the validity of a joint will is concerned.\n\nThe validity of such a will has been several times declared by the courts.\n\nAnd if the will is a disposition by each testator of their property, it may be proved on the death of each testator (In re: 1197).\n\nThe question of its validity is decided by the laws relating to testamentary disposition. Captain Hemmersam could dispose by will of such property as he could lawfully dispose of.\n\nThis will is revocable by the survivor (See: Hobhem v. Blackburn 4 Add. 274).\n\nBut not if she takes advantage of the provisions made by the other testator (See: Denyer v. Mostert L.R. 4 P.C. 236; Dias v. De Livera 5 Moo. P.C. 123, P.C.).\n\n28.1.96 EN 176",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 350515,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892",
        "page_number": 182,
        "title": "CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892",
        "content_text": "As Y.L. will perceive from the Statement, the point which the Tribunal wish to ascertain is whether the form of the joint will, which is transmitted in translation from Hongkong July 15, 1889, is valid.\n\nI have the honour to reply as follows to the letter received from the Arzal dated May 24, 1889, relative to the will of the ship's captain Johann Hemmersam and his wife. The formalities necessary to draw up a will are, according to Captain Hemmersam and his wife's will dated January 25, 1871, in accordance with English Law as enforced in the Colony of Hongkong, or not; and, in particular, whether this will is invalid because the making of joint wills is altogether unlawful, or because certain special formalities necessary to ensure their validity are lacking.\n\nI have acquainted Adatfeldt at the Courts of Oursion that the formalities necessary here in drawing up a will are the same as in England, and consist simply in the will being signed by the testator in the presence of two witnesses, and his signature being certified by the witnesses signing as well. The original of the will which was sent to me would lose its validity by this fact alone, that the testator is not a single person, but a document that is signed and drawn up by two different persons, and would equally have been valid without being drawn up at the same time, since it was raised to have been made at the same time.\n\nBesides which, the objections would be made by the guardian of the children of the ...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 350523,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892",
        "page_number": 190,
        "title": "CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892",
        "content_text": "the law of England; that if that law allows a joint will by which each of the testators disposes of his or her own property and is not invalid; that the will of the late Capt. Hammesser, and his wife, which form the subject of the enquiries of Count Hatzfeldt communicated in your letter, having been signed and attested in the manner required by the law of Hong Kong could, if the question of its validity is to be decided by that law, be held to be a valid testamentary disposition by Capt. Hammersam of such property as he could lawfully dispose of by will. \n\n## Page 188 \n\nI held it to be a valid...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-257 - Public Offices & Others - 1892.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 363122,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5]",
        "page_number": 638,
        "title": "CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5]",
        "content_text": "deemed to be vested in his successor without any further transfer or conveyance.\n\n14. It shall be lawful for the Official Administrator, whenever he thinks it expedient to do so and upon such evidence of death as he deems sufficient, to receive or take possession of the private papers, moneys, goods, chattels, and other movable property whatsoever of any deceased person which may be found within the Colony, and to provide for the safe custody thereof, until probate of the will of such deceased person or administration of his estate has been granted by the Court: Provided always that the Official Administrator may, in lieu thereof, if he thinks fit, issue forthwith a commission of appraisement of all or any of such property.\n\n15. Every person who, without lawful authority or excuse in that behalf, (the proof whereof shall lie on him), (1) Removes or attempts to remove out of the Colony any such property as is mentioned in the last preceding section; or (2) Destroys, conceals, or refuses to yield up any such property on demand to the Official Administrator, shall, on summary conviction thereof, be liable to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars, or to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months, or to both such fine and imprisonment.\n\n16. The Official Administrator shall have a lien upon all property mentioned in section 14 for the reasonable expenses incurred by him in respect thereof in carrying out the provisions of the said section, and such expenses shall also constitute a primary charge on the estate of the deceased person.\n\n17.—(1) When any person dies leaving a will within the Colony, the person in whose keeping such will has been deposited or who finds such will after the testator's death, shall produce, and, if required, shall deliver, the same to the Official Administrator within fourteen days after the death of the testator or from the time when he has had notice thereof, or from the time of the finding of the will, as the case may be. (2) Every person who refuses or neglects to comply with the requirements of this section shall, on summary conviction thereof, be liable to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars.\n\n18. From and after the decease of any person dying intestate and administration is granted in respect of his estate, the estate of such deceased person shall be vested in the Official Administrator.\n\n19. When the whole estate of any person dying intestate in the Colony does not, in the opinion of the Official Administrator, exceed in value the sum of fifty dollars, it shall be lawful for the Official Administrator, if he thinks fit, without any legal formality, to receive or take possession of such estate and to administer the same in a summary manner for the benefit of all persons interested therein.\n\n20.—(1) On application made by the Official Administrator, the Court shall, unless it sees good reason to the contrary, grant to him administration in any of the following cases, that is to say, (a) Where a person dying intestate, whether in this Colony or elsewhere, has left property situate in the Colony and no next of kin of such person are resident in the Colony; (b) Where a person dying intestate, whether in this Colony or elsewhere, has left property situate in the Colony and the next of kin of such person who are resident in the Colony file in the Registry a request for or consent to the making of such grant, in writing signed by them; (c) Where a person dying intestate, whether in this Colony or elsewhere, has left property situate in the Colony, and no person has, within twelve months after the death of such person, obtained administration of his estate; and (d) Where a person dying intestate, whether in this Colony or elsewhere, has left property situate in the Colony and the next of kin of such person who are resident in the Colony are infants under the age of twenty-one years.\n\nPower to Official Administrator to take possession of property of deceased person until grant of probate or administration. (No. 4 of 1870, s. 14.)\n\nPenalty for voluntarily concealing or removing out of the Colony property of deceased person. (No. 9 of 1870, s. 5.)\n\nLien on property of deceased person for expenses under s. 14. (No. 9 of 1870, s. 7.)\n\nObligation on person having custody of will to produce it. (No. 9 of 1870, s. 3.)\n\nVesting of estate of deceased person in Official Administrator until grant of administration. (No. 8 of 1870, s. 20.)\n\nPower to Official Administrator to administer estate of intestate not exceeding $50 in value in summary manner.\n\nCases in which Official Administrator is entitled to administration.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 363124,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5]",
        "page_number": 640,
        "title": "CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5]",
        "content_text": "29. No nation shall be brought to the Official Administrator for anything done by him in respect of the execution or the intended execution of any power vested in him by section 14 or section 19, but any person who feels aggrieved thereby may apply for redress to the Court by summary petition verified upon oath, and the Court may thereupon take such evidence as it thinks fit, and may make such order in relation to the matter which the justice of the case requires.\n\nPART III\n\nGRANTING AND REVOCATION OF PROBATES, ETC.\n\nCaveat.\n\n30.-(1.) A caveat against the grant of any probate or administration may be lodged in the Registry of the Court.\n\n(2.) Subject to any rules or orders made under this Ordinance, the practice and procedure of the Court in respect of any such caveat shall, as nearly as may be, conform with the practice and procedure hitherto in use in respect of such caveats.\n\nExecutorship.\n\n31. Where any person renounces probate of the will of which he is appointed executor or one of the executors, the rights of such person in respect of the executorship shall wholly cease, and the representation of the testator and the administration of his estate shall and may, without any further renunciation, go, devolve, and be committed in like manner as if such person had not been appointed executor.\n\n32. Whenever an executor appointed in a will survives the testator but dies without having taken probate, or, having been cited to take probate, does not appear to such citation, the right of such person in respect of the executorship shall wholly cease, and the representation of the testator and the administration of his estate shall go, devolve, and be committed in like manner as if such person had not been appointed executor.\n\nAdministration.\n\n33. Where a person dies wholly intestate as to his personal estate or leaving a will affecting personal estate but without having appointed an executor thereof willing and competent to take probate, or where the executor is, at the time of the death of such person, resident out of the Colony, or where it appears to the Court to be necessary or convenient to appoint some person to be the administrator of the estate of the deceased person or of any part of such estate, other than the person who, if this Ordinance had not been passed, would by law have been entitled to a grant of administration of such personal estate, it shall be lawful for the Court, in its discretion, to appoint such person as the Court thinks fit to be such administrator upon his giving such security, if any, as the Court may direct, and every such administration may be limited in such manner as the Court thinks fit.\n\n34.-(1.) At the expiration of twelve months from the death of any deceased person, if the executor or executors to whom probate of the will has been granted, or the person or persons to whom administration has been granted, is or are residing out of the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall be lawful for the Court, on the application of any creditor, next of kin, or legatee, grounded on an affidavit made for that purpose, to grant such special administration as it may think fit of the estate of such deceased person.\n\n(2.) It shall be lawful for the Court, on application made for that purpose by any person interested, to direct any shares or stock in any joint stock company to be transferred into the name of the Registrar, in trust for such purposes as the Court may direct, in any suit in which the person to whom such special administration has been granted is a party: Provided, nevertheless, that if any executor or administrator of such deceased person, being capable of acting as such, returns to and resides within the jurisdiction of the Court, the Court may, if it thinks fit, revoke such special grant: Provided, also, that if any suit is pending in any Court in relation to the estate of such deceased person, such executor or administrator shall be entitled to be made a party thereto.\n\nTrust against Fraud\n\n(No. 8 of 1862, s.22)\n\nAmendment\n\n(No. of 1960, s.51-1)\n\nAmendment\n\n(No. 20 of 197#, s.3)\n\nAmendment\n\n(No. of 1960, s.32-1)\n\n632",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 363127,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5]",
        "page_number": 643,
        "title": "CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5]",
        "content_text": "## PART IV. \n## RULES FOR ADMINISTRATION OF PROPERTY\n\n54. (1) When the Court orders a question of fact to be tried by a jury, the question shall be reduced into writing in such form as the Court may direct, and at the trial the jury shall be empanelled to try the question, and a true verdict to give thereon according to the evidence.\n\n(2) Upon every such trial the Court shall have the same jurisdiction, powers, and authority in all respects as belong to a Judge of the said Supreme Court sitting in its original jurisdiction.\n\n### Calendars of Grants.\n\n55. (1) The Judge shall cause to be made from time to time in the Registry of the Court and to be printed calendars of the grants of probate and administration therein for such periods as the Judge may think fit.\n\n(2) Every such calendar shall contain a note of every probate, or administration with the will annexed, or administration granted within the period therein specified.\n\n(3) Every such note shall set forth the date of the grant, the name of the testator or intestate, the place and time of death, the names and descriptions of the executors or administrators, and the value of the effects as set forth in any commission of appraisement or otherwise.\n\n56. The Registrar shall cause a copy of every such calendar to be transmitted to the Governor, to the Principal Registry of the Probate Division of the High Court of Justice in England, to the Sheriff Court of the County of Edinburgh in Scotland, to the Principal Registry of the Probate Division of the High Court of Justice in Ireland, and to such other offices, if any, as the Judge may from time to time direct.\n\n### Specialty and simple contract debts to stand in equal degree. \n**(No. 9 of 1870, s. 2.)**\n\n57. In the administration of the estate of every deceased person no debt or liability of such person shall be entitled to any priority or preference by reason merely that the same is secured by or rises under a bond, deed, or other instrument under seal, or is otherwise made or constituted a specialty debt; but all the creditors of such person, as well specialty as simple contract, shall be treated as standing in equal degree, and be paid accordingly out of the assets of such deceased person, whether such assets are legal or equitable: Provided that this Ordinance shall not prejudice or affect any lien, charge, or other security which any creditor may hold or be entitled to for the payment of his debt.\n\n### Power to the Court in administration suits to limit time for creditors to send in their claims. \n**(No. 9 of 1870, s. 2.)**\n\n58. (1) Any executor or administrator may apply by ex parte petition to the Court for an order limiting the time for creditors and others to send in their claims against the estate of the testator or intestate, and specifying what notices are to be given of the making of such order and of the time thereby limited; and the Court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit.\n\n(2) Where an executor or administrator has given the notices specified in any such order, he shall, at the expiration of the time limited thereby for sending in such claims, be at liberty to distribute the assets of the testator or intestate, or any part thereof, amongst the parties entitled thereto, having regard to the claims of which he has then notice, and shall not be liable for the assets, or any part thereof, so distributed to any person of whose claim he has not had notice at the time of distribution of the assets or a part thereof, as the case may be.\n\n635 \n## Form of question to be tried, etc. \n**(No. 9 of 1900, s. 19.)**\n## Making and particulars of calendars of grants. \n**(No. 9 of 1880, s. 28.)**\n## Distribution of calendars. \n**(No. 9 of 1880, s. 24)** \n(2) Every such jury shall be struck, summoned, balloted for, and called in like manner as if such jury were a jury for the trial of any cause in the said Supreme Court; and every juryman so summoned shall be entitled to the same rights, and subject to the same duties and liabilities, as if he had been duly summoned for the trial of any such cause in the said Supreme Court; and every party to any such proceeding shall be entitled to the same rights as to challenge and otherwise as if he were a party to any such cause.\n\n(3) Generally for all purposes of or auxiliary to the trial of questions of fact by a jury before the Court, and in respect of new trials thereof, and also for all purposes in relation to or consequential upon the direction of issues, the Court shall have the same jurisdiction, powers, and authority in all respects as belong to the said Supreme Court for the like purposes.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-275 - Governor Sir Robinson - 1897 [1-5].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 389913,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-319 - Governor Sir Blake - 1903 [10-11]",
        "page_number": 189,
        "title": "CO129-319 - Governor Sir Blake - 1903 [10-11]",
        "content_text": ".4 UC F Y.\n\nSir,\n\nNo.2, B. 186, 70, Queen's Road, Hongkong, 30th September 1898,\n\nRe Cheong Sau deceased,\n\nReferring to our conversation with you yesterday as to the Probate duty paid in respect of the estate of the above named deceased, we have the honour to send you herewith Mr W. Danby's valuation Report, from which you will see that the Testator's leasehold estate was on the 11th October last valued by him at $228,988. As far as we are aware, the Testator was at the time of his death possessed of no other properties in this Colony than those surveyed by Mr Danby, save and except Subsection A of Section 8 of Inland Lot No.87, which was sold on the 30th August 1897 for the sum of $21,500. Therefore, taking together these two sums, we may put down the total value of his landed properties when he died at $250,488.\n\nOn searching the Land Registers, we find that the properties were encumbered to the extent of $85,000, i.e., Inland Lot No.862 was in mortgage to the China Fire to secure $15,000 and interest at 7%; Inland Lot No.417 to Mr Foster to secure $10,000 and interest at 7½%; Inland Lot No.432 to the Hongkong Fire to secure $22,000 and interest at 7%; Marine Lot No.119 to the Procurator in Hongkong for the Dominican Missions in the Far East to secure $28,000 and interest; and the said Subsection A of Section 8 of Inland Lot 87 to Mr Foster to secure $10,000 was not mentioned but $18,000 is mentioned. We understand from the Executors that the personal effects of the deceased amounted to only about $500. We may then take it for granted that after deducting the amount of encumbrances, the net value of the estate was not more than $165,988 (not $188,000). The debts of the Testator in Hongkong amounted to about $80,500, i.e., to the Bau Tak Tong $50,000, to the Sui Fung Firm $5,000, to the Fu Fung Firm about...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-319 - Governor Sir Blake - 1903 [10-11].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 459934,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "page_number": 67,
        "title": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "content_text": "No 15.\n\nRECT\n\nREGL FEE IS 65\n\nGOVERNMENT HOUSE, HONGKONG. 6th January, 1916.\n\nSir,\n\nIt has recently come to my notice that the establishment of the Hospital known as the Matilda Hospital has never been reported to you and that although references to it have been made in the appendices to the Blue Book it has not been mentioned under the heading \"Institutions not supported by Government\". I regret the omission.\n\n2.\n\nMr. Granville Sharp, who died in 1899, gave the residue of his estate in trust for the erection and maintenance of a Hospital at Mount Kellett to be called the Matilda Hospital. The Hospital was to be of a particular and limited nature, and a doubt arose as to whether the whole of the residuary estate would not be too large an endowment for such a Hospital. An action was therefore begun in 1904 by the trustees of the will and the next of kin, who claimed the surplus if any, for the construction of the will. The Attorney-General was made a party as representing the Crown, which, as parens patriae, is concerned in the administration of charities generally. Sir William Goodman's judgment in this action, delivered on the 2nd June, 1904, directed:-\n\n(1). That the surplus, if any, should not go to the next of kin, but should, according to the doctrine of cyprès, be applied to some other charity. This charity should of course be as like as possible to the original charity intended by the testators.\n\n(2).\n\nTHE RIGHT HONOURABLE ANDREA BONAR LAW, M.P., &c.,\n\nPage 363\n\n...\n\nPage 363",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 459936,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "page_number": 69,
        "title": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "content_text": "In the Supreme Court of Hongkong.\n\nORIGINAL JURISDICTION.\n\nAction No. 46 of 1904.\n\nIN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF GRANVILLE SHARP DECEASED,\n\nBetween ERNEST HAMILTON SHARP, SIR CATCHICK PAUL CHATER, HERBERT SHARP, ROBERT BENTHAM AND ELLEN LYDIA BENTHAM HIS WIFE, JOHN REGINALD WELLS AND HARRIET ELIZABETH WELLS HIS WIFE,\n\nand\n\nTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COLONY OF HONGKONG, THE RIGHT REVEREND GERARD HEATH LANDER, D.D., M.A., THE REVEREND HENRY COPLEY MOYLE, M.A., AND THE REVEREND J. KIRK MACONACHIE,\n\n...Defendants.\n\nWHEREAS the late Granville Sharp (hereinafter called \"the Testator\") who died on the 16th August 1899 by his Will dated the 7th day of June 1896 and Codicil dated the 13th October 1897 gave the residue of his Estate in trust for the erection and maintenance of a Hospital at Mount Kellet in this Colony To the Glory of God, and the good of men; in loving memory of his sainted Wife Matilda Lincolne the same to be called \"Matilda Hospital\" AND WHEREAS the Testator as expressed in his said Will intended that special instructions as to the erection maintenance and government of the Hospital should be added at the end of his said Will AND WHEREAS the only instructions given are those mentioned in the Codicil AND WHEREAS by a Decree of the Supreme Court of Hongkong dated the 2nd June, 1904 the Court (inter alia) ordered and adjudged that an enquiry be made by the Registrar as to the nature scope size and cost of the Hospital directed by the said Will and Codicil to be erected and maintained and as to the Endowment required for such maintenance with a view to the future expansion (if necessary) of such Hospital and that a scheme for the erection endowment and management of such Hospital be prepared by the Executors and Trustees of the said Will and Codicil. NOW THEREFORE in pursuance of the said Decree Sir Catchick Paul Chater and Mr. Ernest Hamilton Sharp, one of His Majesty's Counsel, the present Trustees of the Will and Codicil of the Testator, have prepared the following scheme, which they place before this Honourable Court for the approval of the Court.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 459938,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "page_number": 71,
        "title": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "content_text": "... \n\n- 4- \n\n5 - \n\n69 \n\nB. ENDOWMENT.\n\nTESTATOR'S RESIDUARY ESTATE.\n\nThe Testator's estate remaining after providing for the cost of the erection of the original buildings and the equipment of the main Hospital was on the 30th September, 1914 (the date of the last Balance Sheet) as follows:-\n\nAmount invested in Colonial Government Stocks and British Railway Debenture Stocks, ......\n\nAmount advanced on mortgages of Leasehold properties in Hongkong and Kowloon,\n\nEstimated liability for outstanding legacies and annuities under Testator's Will,\n\n$422,830.28\n\n917,000.00\n\nValue of Testator's leasehold properties in Hong-kong and Kowloon remaining unsold,\n\n939,500.00\n\nCash,\n\n43,886.20\n\n$2,323,216.48\n\n20,000.00\n\n$2,303,216.48\n\nDeducting the estimated cost of the erection and equipment of the Maternity Ward, (see previous page),\n\nThere remains an estimated net surplus of,\n\n105,150.00\n\n$2,198,066.48\n\n$112,728.26\n\nAnd the cost of maintaining and running the Hospital for such year was,\n\n48,552.25\n\n$64,176.01\n\nThe net income of the Estate for the year ending 30th September, 1914 was, ..............................\n\nLeaving a surplus income of, .....................\n\nAfter erection of the Maternity Ward the income will be reduced by the sale of the investments required to provide for the cost of such erection, and the cost of maintaining and running the Hospital will be increased by the addition of such Maternity Ward.\n\nIt is the express wish of the Testator that the Hospital should \"be quite self-supporting\" and \"be able to sustain itself\" and that it should be \"absolutely unnecessary at any time during the continuance of this Institution to appeal to the public in any way for funds for its maintenance.\"\n\nIn view of this and having regard to the need for expansion of the Hospital which the Trustees fully anticipate at no distant date and the continual requirements for repairs and renewals of every kind which its maintenance in the climate of Hongkong will entail the Trustees retain the whole of the surplus residue of the Testator's Estate as a fund to provide for the endowment maintenance and future expansion of the Hospital.\n\n6\n\nC. MANAGEMENT.\n\nNAME OF THE HOSPITAL.\n\nI. The Hospital shall be called \"Matilda Hospital.\"\n\nOBJECTS OF THE HOSPITAL.\n\nII. The objects for which the Matilda Hospital is established are:-\n\n(a) To the Glory of God and for the good of men and in memory of Matilda Lincolne Sharp, Resident in this Colony from 1858 to 1893,\n\n(b) To provide, carry on and maintain a Hospital for the benefit of patients primarily who are poor, helpless and forsaken and to provide gratuitous medical relief to any such person suffering from disease or ill-health.\n\n(c) The Hospital shall be considered to be established as a Religious and Evangelistic Institution.\n\n(d) The Hospital is reserved for British, American and European Patients; Chinese, Portuguese or Japanese are to be excluded,\n\n(e) Generally to do all things necessary or expedient for the proper and effective carrying out of these objects in accordance with the terms of the Will.\n\nTHE GOVERNING BODY.\n\nIII. (1) The Management of the Hospital shall be vested in a Board of management hereinafter called the Governing Body, which shall consist of: —\n\n(a) The Trustees for the time being of the Will and Codicil of the Testator or in case of their absence from time to time their respective Attorneys.\n\n(Such Trustees for the time being are hereinafter called the “Trustees of the Will\")\n\n(b) The Bishop of the Diocese for the time being.\n\nThe Chaplain of St. John's Cathedral for the time being.\n\nThe Minister of the Union Church for the time being.\n\n(All the above, including the Trustees of the Will, are hereinafter called \"The Hospital Trustees\".)\n\n(c) Four Gentlemen who shall be invited by the Governing Body at the last ordinary meeting of each year to act as additional Members of the Governing Body for the period of one year. They shall retire from their said Office on the 31st day of December in each year and they shall be eligible for re-election for a further term or terms of office. The Governing Body may at any time fill any casual vacancies amongst the additional Members,\n\n(2) Save as otherwise provided the Governing Body shall have the superintendence, control and management of the Hospital, its Buildings, and the land upon which it stands, or any other land and buildings acquired for the purpose of extending the same.\n\n(3) The Governing Body may make and formulate such Bye-laws and Regulations as they may from time to time think fit in relation to any matters within the scope of their authority for the regulation of the Hospital, its officers and servants, and may vary and repeal the same from time to time.\n\n(4) A Secretary to the Governing Body shall be appointed at the first meeting in each year whose duties and salary shall be fixed and prescribed by the Governing Body.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 459939,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "page_number": 72,
        "title": "CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2]",
        "content_text": "—6—\n\nMEETINGS.\n\nIV.—(1) The Governing Body shall meet together for the dispatch of business once in every three months or oftener if there is any urgent business to transact on such day and at such hour as the Governing Body shall determine.\n\n(2) They may adjourn and otherwise regulate their Meetings as they think fit.\n\n(3) Three Members of the Governing Body shall form a Quorum but no Quorum shall be complete unless one of the Trustees of the Will or his Attorney and one other of the Hospital Trustees is present at a Meeting.\n\n(4) One of the Trustees of the Will shall preside as Chairman at all Meetings, and if at any Meeting no such Trustee shall be present in person the members present shall elect another of the Hospital Trustees to preside at such Meeting.\n\n(5) Questions arising at any Meeting shall be decided by a majority of votes.\n\n(6) In the event of an equality of votes the Chairman shall have a Second or Casting Vote.\n\n(7) The Governing Body shall cause proper minutes to be made of the proceedings of all Meetings and of the attendance thereat and of all business transacted at such Meetings.\n\nFINANCE COMMITTEE.\n\nV. (1) The Trustees of the Will or their Attorneys as aforesaid shall exercise all the functions of a Finance Committee in connection with the Hospital.\n\n(2) They shall cause true and accurate accounts to be kept of all sums of money expended upon the Hospital and the manner in which such expenditure takes place. They shall keep accurate accounts of its upkeep and annual expenditures. They shall lay such accounts with all proper vouchers before Auditors and the accounts when audited and certified shall be submitted to the Governing Body for adoption.\n\n(3) The Trustees of the Will shall manage the Estate of the Testator and shall have under their charge all the accounts, investments and funds of the Hospital.\n\n(4) The Trustees of the Will shall be entitled as from the 16th day of August 1909 to receive out of the income of the Testator's Estate the annual sum of One thousand dollars each as a remuneration for their trouble and expenses in connection with the administration, realization and management of the Testator's Estate.\n\n(5) The Trustees of the Will shall annually appoint Auditors to audit the accounts of the Estate of the Testator, and shall fix the amount of the Auditors' remuneration.\n\nLADY VISITORS.\n\nVI. The Governing Body shall at the first meeting in every year elect four or more Ladies resident in Hongkong to act as Lady Visitors. The duties of the Lady Visitors shall be to attend at the Hospital weekly, if possible, or oftener, at any hour, to visit the Patients.\n\nADMISSION.\n\nVII.—(1) The Resident Medical Officer shall in all cases enquire into the qualifications of persons who shall be desirous of being relieved as either in or out-patients of the Hospital.\n\n(2) Should the Resident Medical Officer be in doubt as to the admission of any applicant he may take and act upon the advice of any of the Hospital Trustees who may be available. In urgent cases patients may be admitted by the Resident Medical Officer on his own responsibility in the first instance.\n\n(3) The Hospital Trustees shall have the sole right of deciding as to the suitability of any applicant for admission to the Hospital and as to the continuance in the Hospital of any patient who may have been admitted. And in case of any difference of opinion between the Trustees the decision of the majority shall prevail.\n\n(4) No lunatic and no person suffering from an infectious disease such as small-pox, cholera or plague, shall be admitted. This is not to be understood to exclude cases of typhoid fever, dysentery, &c., such as are admitted into other General Hospitals.\n\n(5) The preceding clause shall not prevent temporary shelter being given in hopeless cases.\n\n(6) No in-patients shall be allowed to remain in the Hospital for longer than four months after admission unless by permission of the Hospital Trustees.\n\n(7) Patients shall be at no expense during their residence in the Hospital.\n\n(8) All gratuities by Patients to members of the Staff whether European or Chinese are prohibited.\n\n(9) The Resident Medical Officer, with the approval of the Hospital Trustees, may dismiss a Patient for refusing to obey any of these regulations or any standing order of the Governing Body or declining to follow the medical or surgical directions which have been given.\n\nTHE RESIDENT MEDICAL OFFICER.\n\nVIII (1) A Resident Medical Officer shall be appointed to the Hospital by the Governing Body,\n\n(2) He shall be engaged by the Trustees of the Will and his salary and emoluments shall be paid by them.\n\n(3) He shall be a registered Medical Practitioner and shall perform such duties as may be prescribed by the Governing Body from time to time. He shall be a duly qualified Dispenser, Pathologist and Anaesthetist.\n\n(4) He shall enter into such formal agreement for service as the Governing Body shall approve.\n\n(5) He shall devote himself exclusively to the service of the Hospital and shall not in any way whatever either directly or indirectly exercise his profession outside the Hospital without the express consent of the Hospital Trustees.\n\n(6) He shall exercise all the functions of a House Governor and discharge all the duties of a Secretary to the Hospital.\n\n(7) He shall at the beginning of every year draw up and submit to the Governing Body a Report on the working of the Hospital for the preceding year.\n\nTHE MATRON.\n\nIX. (1) A Matron shall be appointed to the Hospital by the Governing Body.\n\n(2) She shall be engaged by the Trustees of the Will who will pay her salary and emoluments.\n\n(3) She shall be a duly qualified Nursing Sister preferably of British nationality, and shall perform such duties as may be prescribed by the Governing Body and by the Resident Medical Officer from time to time.\n\n(4) She shall enter into such formal agreement for service as the Governing Body shall approve.\n\n70",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-431 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [1-2].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 461804,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-433 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [5-6]",
        "page_number": 437,
        "title": "CO129-433 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [5-6]",
        "content_text": "## VII. INSTITUTIONS\n\n### (6.) LUNATIC ASYLUM\n\nThe Asylum is under the direction of the Superintendent of the Civil Hospital. European and Chinese patients are separated, the European portion containing 8 beds in separate wards and the Chinese portion 16 beds. 201 patients of all races were treated during 1915 and there were 4 deaths.\n\n### (c) THE TUNG WA AND OTHER CHINESE HOSPITALS\n\nThe Tung Wa Hospital, opened in 1872, is mainly supported by the voluntary subscriptions of Chinese, but receives an annual grant of $38,000 from the Government. Only Chinese are treated in this institution. Various other services not appertaining to a hospital are performed by the institution, such as the free burial of the poor, the repatriation of destitutes, and the organisation of charitable relief in emergencies. Chinese as well as European methods of treatment are employed in accordance with the wishes expressed by the patients or their friends. About half the number are now treated by Western methods. The hospital is managed by a committee of Chinese gentlemen annually elected, their appointment being submitted to the Governor for confirmation. It is under the supervision of a visiting physician, who is a member of the Medical Department, whilst a Chinese house surgeon, trained in Western medicine, is a member of the hospital staff. There are 323 beds in the buildings and 4,796 patients were accommodated during 1915.\n\nThe Tung Wa also maintain a branch hospital for small-pox cases (Chinese only) at Kennedy Town. It contains 58 beds and during 1915, 7 cases were treated.\n\nThe Alice Memorial and Affiliated Hospitals are managed and controlled by the missionaries resident in Hongkong, agents of the London Missionary Society, and consist of the Alice Memorial Hospital opened in 1887, the Nethersole Hospital opened in 1893, the Alice Memorial Maternity Hospital opened in 1904 and the Ho Miu Ling Hospital opened in 1906. The number of in-patients in 1915 was 1,059 and the expenditure $15,787.90. The number of labours in the Maternity Hospital was 428. The Government makes a grant of $300 per annum to these Hospitals.\n\nTo avoid the complete seclusion from friends and relatives which removal of Chinese plague patients to the Kennedy Town Infectious Diseases Hospital entailed, four District Plague Hospitals are now maintained by the Chinese in various parts of the Colony. These hospitals are under the management of the Chinese Public Dispensaries Committee and receive a grant of $2,000 a year from the Government.\n\nThe new Kwong Wa Hospital for Chinese in the Kowloon Peninsula was opened on the 9th October, 1911. It occupies a site having an area of 3 acres and provides accommodation for 210 patients. The existing buildings contain 70 beds and 1,904 patients were accommodated during 1915. The collection of subscriptions and the supervision of the building were undertaken by a special committee under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs. The hospital receives a grant of $8,500 per annum from the Government.\n\n## VII. INSTITUTIONS NOT SUPPORTED BY GOVERNMENT\n\nOne of the most important institutions in the Colony not supported by the Government is the Matilda Hospital, which stands on a commanding site of nearly three acres at Mount Kellet in the Hill District. It consists of a main building containing six wards with 26 beds, quarters for four nurses, a house for the Medical Officer in charge and an operation block. A Maternity Ward, connected by a covered way with the main building, is in course of erection. The total cost of the buildings and their equipment has been more than $600,000. The hospital was erected in pursuance of the directions of the late Mr. Granville Sharp, who died on the 18th August, 1899, and who by his will gave the residue of his estate, amounting to more than $2,000,000, in trust \"for the erection and maintenance of a Hospital at Mount Kellet in this Colony to the Glory of God, and the good of men; in loving memory of his sainted Wife Matilda Lincolne, the same to be called 'Matilda Hospital'\".\n\nThe management of the hospital is vested in a Governing Body consisting of:\n\n| Members |\n| --- |\n| The Trustees for the time being of the will of the Testator. |\n| The Bishop of the Diocese. |\n| The Chaplain of St. John's Cathedral. |\n\nPage 24\nPage 25\nPage 430",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-433 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [5-6].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 461805,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-433 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [5-6]",
        "page_number": 438,
        "title": "CO129-433 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [5-6]",
        "content_text": "— 26 —\n\nThe Minister of the Union Church, Four additional members.\n\nThe objects for which the hospital is established are:-\n\n(a) To provide, carry on and maintain a hospital for the benefit of patients primarily who are poor, helpless and forsaken and to provide gratuitous medical relief to any such person suffering from disease or ill-health.\n\n(b) The hospital shall be considered to be established as a Religious and Evangelistic Institution.\n\n(c) The hospital is reserved for British, American, and European Patients.\n\nIt was the express wish of the Testator that the hospital should be quite self-supporting, and be able to maintain itself, and that it should be absolutely unnecessary at any time during the continuance of the institution to appeal to the public in any way for funds for its maintenance.\n\nAmong institutions recognised and encouraged, but not to any considerable extent supported by Government may be mentioned the Po Leung Kuk, the Eyre Refuge, the City Hall, and the Chinese Public Dispensaries.\n\nThe Po Leung Kuk is a Chinese Society founded in 1878 for the suppression of kidnapping and traffic in human beings. It was incorporated in 1893 and is presided over by the Secretary for Chinese Affairs and not more than nine directors nominated by the Governor. The actual management is entrusted to a committee elected annually by the members of the Society. The Society's buildings have been declared a Refuge under the Women and Girls Protection Ordinance, and almost all women and girls detained by the Secretary for Chinese Affairs under that Ordinance are sent to the Po Leung Kuk. During 1915 the number of persons admitted was 567 and at the close of the year 75 remained under the care of the Society. The inmates are under the immediate charge of a Chinese matron, and instruction is given them by the matron and a Chinese teacher in elementary subjects and in needlework.\n\nThe Eyre Diocesan Refuge is an institution, under mission auspices, founded for rescue work among the Chinese. It is now housed in the Belilios Reformatory and receives a small grant from the Government. It was temporarily closed after the outbreak of war.\n\nThe City Hall receives an annual grant of $1,200 from Government. It contains a theatre, some large rooms which are used for balls, meetings, concerts, etc., a museum in which are some very fair specimens, and a large reference and lending library, to which new volumes are added from time to time, as funds will allow. The building was erected in 1866-9 by subscription.\n\nSmall grants are also given to the Italian Convent, the French Convent, (both of which take in and tend abandoned or sick infants), the West Point Orphanage, the Seamen's Hospital, and other charitable institutions.\n\nThe Chinese Public Dispensaries are institutions maintained in order to provide the Chinese with the services of doctors, whose certificates will be accepted by the Registrar of Deaths, and with the services of interpreters, who can assist the inmates of houses, where a case of infectious disease has occurred. Coolies are engaged and ambulances and dead vans provided in order to remove cases of infectious disease to the Infectious Diseases Hospital and dead bodies to the Mortuary. The Dispensaries receive sick infants and send them to one or other of the Convents and arrange for the burial of dead infants. Free advice and medicine are given and patients are attended at their houses. There are nine Dispensaries in existence including one for the boat population on a hulk in Causeway Bay. The total cost of maintenance, which is defrayed by voluntary subscription, was $42,433.71 for the year 1915. The Dispensaries are conducted by committees under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs.\n\n## VII - CRIMINAL AND POLICE\n\nThe total of all cases reported to the Police was 9,460 being an increase of 643 or 7.29 per cent. as compared with 1914. There was in 1915 an increase in serious offences of 140 or 1.69 per cent. as compared with the previous year. The number of serious offences reported was 97 below the average of the quinquennial period commencing with the year 1911. The number of minor offences reported shows an increase of 503 as compared with 1914 and was 31 over the average of the quinquennial period.\n\nThe total strength of the Police Force in 1915 was Europeans 164, Indians 463, Chinese 645, making a total of 1,272 (as compared with 1,283 in 1914) exclusive of the five superior officers and staff of clerks and coolies. These figures include police paid for by the Railway and other Government Departments and by private firms. Of this force 14 Europeans, 142 Indians and 38 Chinese were stationed in the New Territories during the year, under an Assistant Superintendent.\n\nThe District Watchmen Force, numbering 100, to which the Government contributes $2,000 per annum, was well supported by the Chinese during the year. These watchmen patrol the streets in the Chinese quarter of the City. They are placed on police beats and are supervised by the European police on section patrol.\n\nThe total number of persons committed to Victoria Gaol was 4,179 as compared with 4,050 in 1914. Of these 1,260 were committed for criminal offences, against 935 in 1914. Of committals...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-433 - Governor Sir May - 1916 [5-6].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 467977,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6]",
        "page_number": 281,
        "title": "CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6]",
        "content_text": "22 -\n\nThe management of the hospital is vested in a Governing Body consisting of :—\n\nThe Trustees for the time being of the will of the Testator. The Bishop of the Diocese.\n\nThe Chaplain of St. John's Cathedral.\n\nThe Minister of the Union Church.\n\nFour additional members,\n\nThe objects for which the hospital is established are:\n\n(a) To provide, carry on and maintain a hospital for the benefit of patients primarily who are poor, helpless and forsaken and to provide gratuitous medical relief to any such person suffering from disease or ill-health.\n\n(b) The hospital shall be considered to be established as a Religious and Evangelistic Institution.\n\n(c) The hospital is reserved for British, American, and European Patients.\n\nIt was the express wish of the Testator that the hospital should be quite self-supporting, and be able to maintain itself, and that it should be absolutely unnecessary at any time during the continuance of the institution to appeal to the public in any way for funds for its maintenance.\n\nAmong institutions recognised and encouraged; but not to any considerable extent supported by Government may be mentioned the Po Leung Kuk, the Eyre Refuge, the City Hall, and the Chinese Public Dispensaries.\n\nThe Po Leung Kuk is a Chinese Society founded in 1878 for the suppression of kidnapping and traffic in human beings. It was incorporated in 1893 and is presided over by the Secretary for Chinese Affairs and not more than nine directors nominated by the Governor. The actual management is entrusted to a committee elected annually by the members of the Society. The Society's buildings have been declared a Refuge under the Women and Girls Protection Ordinance, and almost all women and girls detained by the Secretary for Chinese Affairs under that Ordinance are sent to the Po Leung Kuk. During 1916 the number of persons admitted was 590 and at the close of the year 78 remained under the care of the Society. The inmates are under the immediate charge of a Chinese matron, and instruction is given them by the matron and a Chinese teacher in elementary subjects and in needlework.\n\nThe Eyre Diocesan Refuge is an institution, under mission auspices, founded for rescue work among the Chinese. It was housed in the Belilios Reformatory up to the outbreak of war, but the work is at present carried on at Kowloon City. A small grant is made by the Government.\n\n- 23-\n\nThe City Hall receives an annual grant of $1,200 from Government. It contains a theatre, some large rooms which are used for balls, meetings, concerts, etc., a museum in which are some very fair specimens, and a large reference and lending library, to which new volumes are added from time to time, as funds will allow. The building was erected in 1866-9 by subscription.\n\nSmall grants are also given to the Italian Convent, the French Convent, (both of which take in and tend abandoned or sick infants), the West Point Orphanage, the Seamen's Hospital, and other charitable institutions.\n\nThe Chinese Public Dispensaries are institutions maintained in order to provide the Chinese with the services of doctors, whose certificates will be accepted by the Registrar of Deaths, and with the services of interpreters, who can assist the inmates of houses, where a case of infectious disease has occurred. Coolies are engaged and ambulances and dead vans provided in order to remove cases of infectious disease to the Infectious Diseases Hospital and dead bodies to the Mortuary. The Dispensaries receive sick infants and send them to one or other of the Convents and arrange for the burial of dead infants. Free advice and medicine are given and patients are attended at their houses. There are eight Dispensaries in existence; the one for the boat population on a hulk in Causeway Bay was dispensed with and amalgamated with the Yaumati Dispensary. The total cost of maintenance, which is defrayed by voluntary subscription, was $39,766.07 for the year 1916. The Dispensaries are conducted by committees under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Chinese Affairs.\n\nVIII-CRIMINAL AND POLICE.\n\nThe total of all cases reported to the Police was 11,319 being an increase of 1,859 or 19.65 per cent as compared with 1915. There was in 1916 an increase in serious offences of 396 or 12.68 per cent as compared with the previous year. The number of serious offences reported was 49 over the average of the quinquennial period commencing with the year 1912. The number of minor offences reported shows an increase of 1,306 as compared with 1915 and was 497 over the average of the quinquennial period.\n\nThe total strength of the Police Force in 1916 was Europeans 165, Indians 463, Chinese 587, making a total of 1,215 (as compared with 1,289 in 1915) exclusive of the five superior officers and staff of clerks and coolies. These figures include police paid for by the Railway and other Government Departments. Of this force 14 Europeans, 137 Indians, and 30 Chinese were stationed in the New Territories during the year, under an Assistant Superintendent.\n\nUp to the end of the year forty-one members of the Hong...\n\n279",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-442 - Governor Sir May - 1917 [4-6].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 479459,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-453 - Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1919 [1-3]",
        "page_number": 436,
        "title": "CO129-453 - Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1919 [1-3]",
        "content_text": "## Trustees' Letter\n\nWe understand that in order to obtain such a lease it is necessary that the matter should be referred to the Secretary of State, and we respectfully ask that His Excellency will so refer it and will support the application with an expression of his approval.\n\nThe Hospital is, as His Excellency knows, fully endowed under Mr. Granville Sharp's Will and is not dependent in any way upon outside assistance, and there can be no risk therefore of its at any time failing of its purpose for want of funds; and as its objects are purely charitable (being as the Testator's Will expressly states designed \"for the benefit of patients primarily who are poor, helpless, and forsaken\") its establishment on a permanent basis is desirable on every ground, and not least in the interests of the Colony itself.\n\nThe lease at present proposed would only give a little more than 40 years from the present time, a term quite inadequate and unsuitable for the purpose of such an Institution, which is likely to be further added to and enlarged as time goes on.\n\nWe are, etc.,\n\n**(Sa.)** C.P. CHATER,  \n**(Sa.)** E.H. SHARP,  \nTrustees of the Will of Granville Sharp deceased.\n\nThe Honourable Colonial Secretary,  \nHongkong.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-453 - Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1919 [1-3].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 479463,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-453 - Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1919 [1-3]",
        "page_number": 440,
        "title": "CO129-453 - Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1919 [1-3]",
        "content_text": "# JOHNSON, STOKES & MASTER.\n\nThe Honourable  \nColonial Secretary.  \nHONGKONG, 5th February, 1919.\n\nSir,\n\nGranville Sharp Deceased.  \nMatilda Hospital site.\n\nSome time ago in connection with an arrangement for amalgamating the several lots forming the site of this Hospital into one Lot (to be called Rural Building Lot No. 16) and granting a new Crown Lease of such Lot, our clients the Honourable Sir C.P. Chater, C.M.G., and the Honourable Mr. E.H. Sharp K.C., the Trustees of the late Mr. Granville Sharp's Will, approached the Government with a view to the grant of a longer lease than the existing terms under the present Leases which have now (on the average) less than 40 years unexpired.\n\nThe Trustees' desire was (and is) to have a lease for 999 years, and in support of their application they pointed out that since the testator's death in 1899 they had expended under the trusts of his Will in the erection and equipment of the Hospital not far short of $700,000 and that for an undertaking of this size and character a term of 40 years was quite inadequate and unsuitable, particularly as the Hospital is a wholly charitable institution and fully endowed under the testator's Will and is in no way dependent upon outside assistance for its maintenance. There is therefore no risk of its failing for lack of support, and this enhances the claim for its permanent establishment with proper security of tenure, which is the more important as the question of laying out further trust funds upon extensions...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-453 - Acting Governor Claud Severn - 1919 [1-3].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 483775,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "page_number": 128,
        "title": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "content_text": "IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONGKONG\n\nORIGINAL JURISDICTION\n\nSuit No. 46 of 1901.\n\nThe Attorney General v. Sarah Jaques, Executrix of Joseph Jacques, deceased.\n\nTuesday 25th June 1901.\n\nX.C.M.G.\n\nJudgment of His Hon. Sir John W. Carrington, Chief Justice.\n\nPlaintiff. Defendant.\n\n126\n\nIn this case the parties filed a memorandum of agreement under Section 88 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the purpose of obtaining the finding of the Court upon a question of law which is stated in a special case annexed to the memorandum. By the memorandum it is agreed that if the finding of the Court is in the affirmative of the question submitted to it, the defendant is to pay to the Colonial Treasurer certain probate duty in respect of the estate of her testator, while if the finding is in the negative the plaintiff is to withdraw his claim for payment of that probate duty.\n\nThe facts upon which the question arises are set forth in the special case, and may be shortly stated as follows:\n\nThe testator died in England on the 23rd January, 1900, and probate of his will was granted by the High Court of Justice Probate Division to the defendant on the 2nd May, 1900.\n\nAn exemplification of the probate was sealed with the seal of this Court in its Probate Jurisdiction on the 7th August, 1900, and probate duty was paid on property of the estate in this Colony, consisting of shares in various companies of the total value of $629,367.70.\n\nSince this payment was made it has been ascertained that, in addition to these shares, the testator was entitled to the undermentioned parcels of shares namely:\n\n(1) A parcel of 767 shares in the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, which were on the London Register of the Corporation and the Scrip or Share certificates which were at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the corporation in London, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to £975.5.6d;\n\n(2) A parcel of 705 shares in the same Corporation which were on the Shanghai Register of the Corporation and were at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the Corporation at Shanghai, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to Taels 252,412.72 (Shanghai Sycee).\n\nThe Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation was incorporated in Hongkong by Ordinance No. 5 of 1866 and exists and is governed by the provisions of that Ordinance and of the Deed of Settlement mentioned therein and of certain later Ordinances extending and amending the Original Ordinance of Incorporation.\n\nThe Head Office of the Corporation is in Hongkong, and the business of the Corporation is managed and controlled by a Court of Directors in Hongkong. A Register of Shareholders is kept in Hongkong, a separate volume being opened and kept for Hongkong Shareholders, for English Shareholders, for Shanghai Shareholders and for Calcutta Shareholders respectively.\n\n-1-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 483776,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "page_number": 129,
        "title": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "content_text": "127\n\nSeparate registers have for many years past been opened and kept by the Corporation in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta for Shareholders in England, in China, and in India respectively.\n\nIt appears that so far back as the 4th November, 1865, that is some time before the date of the Ordinance of Incorporation and of the Deed of Settlement - the managers and agents of the Corporation at these places were empowered by the Court of Directors to sign Scrips for shares at their respective branches or agencies. On the 19th December, 1867, the Court of Directors further authorised the special agent of the Corporation in London to get a duplicate seal of the Corporation made and to affix that seal to shares on, or to be put on, the London Register.\n\n\"Shares held in the above mentioned countries have been habitually transferred on the local Registers and share certificates have been issued in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta to the transferees without any reference to the Court of Directors or to the Chief Manager in Hongkong. The Registers kept in Hongkong for shareholders resident in the said countries are merely transcripts of the local Register kept in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta respectively, all transfers of shares being reported to Hongkong periodically by the local managers.\n\n\"In these circumstances the plaintiff as representing the Crown claims from the defendant as Executrix of the testator payment of probate duty in Hongkong on the above mentioned 1,472 shares, on the ground that they are situate within the Probate Jurisdiction of this Court and therefore form part of the estate and effects of the testator upon which probate duty ought to be paid in this Colony. The defendant, on the other hand, resists payment of the probate duty so claimed on the ground that the shares in question are not property locally situate in Hongkong, but are property situate in England and within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court at Shanghai respectively.\n\n\"The defendant admits that there is no express authority in the Ordinances constituting and affecting the Corporation or in the Corporation Deed of Settlement for the opening of the Registers in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta. The Corporation is not subject to the provisions of the Companies' Ordinances.\n\n\"In this state of facts the following question is raised for the decision of the Court: - Whether the said 1,472 shares or any of them are property which is liable to the payment of probate duty in Hongkong, under the provisions of Ordinances No.16 of 1886 and No.13 of 1894, or not?\n\nnamely:\n\nanswer to the\n\n\"It is obvious, that the answer to this question depends upon the answer to be made to another question - Whether the shares in question were lawfully and properly transferred and borne on the local Register in London and at Shanghai? The answer to this question is in its turn dependant on the question whether the Corporation is empowered by the terms of its Ordinances or its Deed of Settlement to establish local Registers of shareholders in London and at Shanghai, and to provide for the transfer and holding of shares on those Registers as valid and effectual in themselves without reference to the Register of Shareholders in Hongkong. It is clear that a judicial determination of this question must be a matter of considerable importance to the Corporation, and therefore I was careful to enquire at the hearing as to the position of the Corporation in respect of these proceedings. I was informed that, as attorney for the defendant, the Corporation was fully cognisant of the proceedings.\n\n\"It is admitted in the special case that the Ordinances of the Corporation and its Deed of Settlement contain no express authority enabling the Corporation to establish the local Registers. We must therefore examine the Ordinances and Deed of Settlement to see whether any general or implied authority to that effect is conferred by them or either of them. The Ordinances do not contain any provisions for regulating the management of the affairs of the Corporation; all such matters are expressly left to be dealt with by the Deed of Settlement. The keeping of Registers of Shareholders is clearly one of such matters; it remains therefore to consider what are the provisions of the Deed of Settlement relating to this subject.\n\n-2-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 483780,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "page_number": 133,
        "title": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "content_text": "IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONGKONG\n\nORIGINAL JURISDICTION\n\nSuit No. 46 of 1901.\n\nThe Attorney General v. Sarah Jaques, Executrix of Joseph Jacques, deceased.\n\n1\n\nTuesday 25th June 1901\n\nJudgment of His Hon. Sir John W. Carrington, K.C.M.G. Chief Justice.\n\nPlaintiff. Defendant.\n\n130\n\nIn this case the parties filed a memorandum of agreement under Section 88 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the purpose of obtaining the finding of the Court upon a question of law which is stated in a special case annexed to the memorandum.\n\nBy the memorandum it is agreed that if the finding of the Court is in the affirmative of the question submitted to it, the defendant is to pay to the Colonial Treasurer certain probate duty in respect of the estate of her testator, while if the finding is in the negative the plaintiff is to withdraw his claim for payment of that probate duty.\n\nThe facts upon which the question arises are set forth in the special case, and may be shortly stated as follows: -\n\nThe testator died in England on the 23rd January, 1900, and probate of his will was granted by the High Court of Justice Probate Division to the defendant on the 2nd May, 1900.\n\nAn exemplification of the probate was sealed with the seal of this Court in its Probate Jurisdiction on the 7th August, 1900, and probate duty was paid on property of the estate in this Colony, consisting of shares in various companies of the total value of $629,367.70.\n\nSince this payment was made it has been ascertained that, in addition to these shares, the testator was entitled to the undermentioned parcels of shares namely: -\n\n(1) A parcel of 767 shares in the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, which were on the London Register of the Corporation and the Scrip or Share certificates which were at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the corporation in London, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to £975.5.6d;\n\n(2) A parcel of 705 shares in the same Corporation which were on the Shanghai Register of the Corporation and were at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the Corporation at Shanghai, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to Taels 252,412.72 (Shanghai Sycee).\n\nThe Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation was incorporated in Hongkong by Ordinance No. E of 1866 and exists and is governed by the provisions of that Ordinance and of the Deed of Settlement mentioned therein and of certain later Ordinances extending and amending the Original Ordinance of incorporation.\n\nThe Head office of the Corporation is in Hongkong, and the business of the Corporation is managed and controlled by a Court of Directors in Hongkong. A Register of Shareholders is kept in Hongkong, a separate volume being opened and kept for Hongkong Shareholders, for English Shareholders, for Shanghai Shareholders and for Calcutta Shareholders respectively.\n\n-1-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 483781,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "page_number": 134,
        "title": "CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7]",
        "content_text": "131\n\nSeparate registers have for many years past been opened and kept by the Corporation in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta for Shareholders in England, in China, and in India respectively. It appears that so far back as the 4th November, 1865, that is some time before the date of the Ordinance of Incorporation and of the Deed of Settlement - the managers and agents of the Corporation at these places were empowered by the Court of Directors to sign Scrips for shares at their respective branches or agencies. On the 19th December, 1867, the Court of Directors further authorised the special agent of the Corporation in London to get a duplicate seal of the Corporation made and to affix that seal to shares on, or to be put on, the London Register.\n\n\"Shares held in the above mentioned countries have been habitually transferred on the local registers and share certificates have been issued in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta to the transferees without any reference to the Court of Directors or to the Chief Manager in Hongkong. The Registers kept in Hongkong for shareholders resident in the said countries are merely transcripts of the local Register kept in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta respectively, all transfers of shares being reported to Hongkong periodically by the local managers.\n\n\"In these circumstances the plaintiff as representing the Crown claims from the defendant as Executrix of the testator payment of probate duty in Hongkong on the above mentioned 1,472 shares, on the ground that they are situate within the Probate Jurisdiction of this Court and therefore form part of the estate and effects of the testator upon which probate duty ought to be paid in this Colony. The defendant, on the other hand, resists payment of the probate duty so claimed on the ground that the shares in question are not property locally situate in Hongkong, but are property situate in England and within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court at Shanghai respectively.\n\nThe defendant admits that there is no express authority in the Ordinances constituting and affecting the Corporation or in the Corporation Deed of Settlement for the opening of the Registers in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta. The Corporation is not subject to the provisions of the Companies' Ordinances.\n\n\"In this state of facts the following question is raised for the decision of the Court: - Whether the said 1,472 shares or any of them are property which is liable to the payment of probate duty in Hongkong, under the provisions of Ordinances No.16 of 1886 and No.13 of 1894, or not?\n\n\"It is obvious, that the answer to this question depends upon the answer to be made to another question namely: whether the shares in question were lawfully and properly transferred and borne on the local Registers in London and at Shanghai? The answer to this question is in its turn dependant on the question whether the Corporation is empowered by the terms of its Ordinances or its Deed of Settlement to establish local Registers of shareholders in London and at Shanghai, and to provide for the transfer and holding of shares on those Registers as valid and effectual in themselves without reference to the Register of Shareholders in Hongkong. It is clear that a judicial determination of this question must be a matter of considerable importance to the Corporation, and therefore I was careful to enquire at the hearing as to the position of the Corporation in respect of these proceedings. I was informed that, as attorney for the defendant, the Corporation was fully cognisant of the proceedings.\n\n\"It is admitted in the special case that the Ordinances of the Corporation and its Deed of Settlement contain no express authority enabling the Corporation to establish the local Registers. We must therefore examine the Ordinances and Deed of Settlement to see whether any general or implied authority to that effect is conferred by them or either of them. The Ordinances do not contain any provisions for regulating the management of the affairs of the Corporation; all such matters are expressly left to be dealt with by the Deed of Settlement. The keeping of Registers of Shareholders is clearly one of such matters; it remains therefore to consider what are the provisions of the Deed of Settlement relating to this subject.\n\n-2-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-461 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1920 [5-7].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 490597,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-472 - Others - 1921",
        "page_number": 289,
        "title": "CO129-472 - Others - 1921",
        "content_text": "## DOH. (COPY)\n\nFrom the Representative of the **Wichsausgleichsamt**.  \nÍgb. A. No. 7409.\n\nSir,\n\n**TRANSLATION**  \n286  \nLondon, 24 March, 1921.\n\nI have the honour to submit the following:  \nGustav Theodor Siemsson, a German national who died on 30th September 1915, left sums of money invested in British Joint Stock Companies in China and Hong Kong. The legatees have heard nothing concerning the sale; on the other hand, the Custodian in Shanghai, Allan G. Mossop, handed an account made up to June or July 1919 to one of the legatees, F. Siemssen of Bergedorf near Hamburg, during his sojourn in China, after his release from internment in a Japanese Prisoners of War Camp. According to this account, the estate amounted to circa Shanghai Taels 80,000. On making a petition to the British Embassy in Peking, Herr Siemssen was paid Taels 3000 to defray the expenses of the return journey for himself and his family. A further application for an allowance for the means of subsistence was declined. The principal legatees of Herr Siemssen, namely his wife, have four children, who are not yet of age. The testator travelled to Germany in the year 1913 with his wife and children on a temporary visit. Their return was prevented owing to the war. Frau Siemssen has only sufficient means for a few months to maintain herself and her children.\n\nI shall be greatly obliged if you can obtain the release of part of the assets.\n\nI have the honour to be,  \nSir,  \nYour obedient Servant,  \n(Signature).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-472 - Others - 1921.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 491516,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "page_number": 57,
        "title": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "content_text": "COPY.\n\nIN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONGKONG\n\nORIGINAL JURISDICTION\n\n55\n\nSUIT NO. 46 of 1901.\n\nThe Attorney General\n\nPlaintiff,\n\nVs.\n\nSarah Jaques, Executrix of\n\nJoseph Jaques, deceased.\n\nDefendant.\n\nTuesday 25th June. 1901.\n\nJUDGMENT OF HIS HON. SIR JOHN W. CARRINGTON, Kt. C.M.G.\n\nCHIEF JUSTICE.\n\nIn this case the parties filed a memorandum of agreement\n\nunder Section 88 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the purpose\n\nof obtaining the finding of the Court upon a question of law, which is stated in a special case annexed to the memorandum. By the memorandum it is agreed that if the finding of the Court is in the affirmative of the question submitted to it, the defendant is to pay to the Colonial Treasurer certain probate duty in respect of the estate of her testator, while if the finding is in the negative the Plaintiff is to withdraw his claim for payment of that probate duty.\n\nThe facts upon which the question arises are set forth\n\nin the special case, and may be shortly stated as follows:-\n\nThe testator died in England on the 23rd January, 1900, and probate of his will was granted by the High Court of Justice Probate Division to the defendant on the 2nd May, 1900.\n\nAn exemplification of the probate was sealed with the seal of this Court in its Probate Jurisdiction on the 7th August 1900, and probate duty was paid on property of the estate in this Colony consisting of shares in various companies of the total value of $529,367.70.\n\nSince",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 491517,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "page_number": 58,
        "title": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "content_text": "Since this payment was made it has been ascertained that, in addition to these shares, the testator was entitled to the undermentioned parcels of shares namely:-\n\n(1). A parcel of 767 shares in the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, which were on the London Register of the Corporation and the Scrip or share certificates which were, at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the Corporation in London, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to £975.58.6d.\n\n(2). A parcel of 705 shares in the same Corporation which were on the Shanghai Register of the Corporation and were at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the Corporation at Shanghai, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to Taels 252,412.72 (Shanghai Sycee).\n\nThe Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation was incorporated in Hongkong by Ordinance No.5 of 1866 and exists and is governed by the provisions of that Ordinance and of the Deed of Settlement mentioned therein and of certain later Ordinances extending and amending the Original Ordinance of Incorporation.\n\nThe Head Office of the Corporation is in Hongkong, and the business of the Corporation is managed and controlled by a Court of Directors in Hongkong. A Register of Shareholders is kept in Hongkong, a separate volume being opened and kept for Hongkong Shareholders, for English Shareholders, for Shanghai Shareholders and for Calcutta Shareholders respectively.\n\nSeparate registers have for many years past been opened and kept by the Corporation in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta for Shareholders in England, in China, and in India respectively. It appears that so far back as the 4th November, 1865, that is some time before the date of the Ordinance of Incorporation and of the Deed of Settlement, the managers and agents of the Corporation at these places were empowered by the Court",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 491518,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "page_number": 59,
        "title": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "content_text": "ATE \n\nnot \n\n*** \n\namist edT \n\nIon \n\n.(). \n\n333 \n\nto \n\n:) \n\n\"OGIC \n\nr \n\n57 \n\nCourt of Directors to sign scrips for shares at their respective branches or agencies. On the 19th December 1867, the Court of Directors further authorised the special agent of the Corporation in London to get a duplicate seal of the Corporation made and to affix that seal to shares on, or to be put on, the London Register.\n\n\"Shares held in the above mentioned countries have been habitually transferred on the local Registers and share Certificates have been issued in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta to the transferees without any reference to the Court of Directors or to the Chief Manager in Hongkong. The Registers kept in Hongkong for shareholders resident in the said countries are merely transcripts of the local Registers kept in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta respectively, all transfers of shares being reported to Hongkong periodically by the local managers.\n\n\"In these circumstances the plaintiff as representing the Crown claims from the defendant as Executrix of the testator payment of probate duty in Hongkong on the above mentioned 1,472 shares, on the ground that they are situate within the Probate Jurisdiction of this Court and therefore form part of the Estate and effects of the testator upon which probate duty ought to be paid in this Colony. The defendant, on the other hand, resists payment of the probate duty so claimed on the ground that the shares in question are not property locally situate in Hongkong, but are property situate in England and within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court at Shanghai respectively.\n\n\"The defendant admits that there is no express authority in the Ordinances constituting and affecting the Corporation or in the Corporation Deed of Settlement for the opening of the Registers in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta. The Corporation is not subject to the provisions of the Companies' Ordinances.\n\n\"In this state of facts the following question is raised for the decision of the Court:- Whether the said 1,472 shares",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 491525,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "page_number": 66,
        "title": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "content_text": "IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONGKONG\n\nIN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONGKONG\n\nORIGINAL JURISDICTION\n\nSUIT NO. 46 of 1901.\n\nThe Attorney General\n\nORIGINAL JURISDICTION\n\nSUIT NO. 46 of 1901.\n\nPlaintiff,\n\nV.\n\nThe Attorney General\n\nSarah Jaques, Executrix of Joseph Jaques, deceased.\n\nDefendant.\n\n64\n\nV.\n\nSarah Jaques, Executrix\n\nof Joseph Jaques, deceased.\n\nJUDGMENT.\n\nSOLICITORS,\n\nJOHNSON, STOKES & MASTER,\n\n&c.,\n\nHongkong.\n\nFol.37 E\n\nTuesday 25th June, 1901,\n\nJUDGMENT OF HIS HON. SIR JOHN J. CARINGTON, Kt.\n\nCHIEF JUSTICE.\n\nIn this case the parties filed a memorandum of agreement under Section 68 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the purpose of obtaining the finding of the Court upon a question of law, which is stated in the special case annexed to the memorandum. By the memorandum it is agreed that if the finding of the Court is in the affirmative of the question submitted to it, the defendant is to pay to the Colonial Treasurer certain probate duty in respect of the estate of her testator, while if the finding is in the negative the Plaintiff is to withdraw his claim for payment of that probate duty.\n\nThe facts upon which the question arises are set forth in the special case, and may be shortly stated as follows:-\n\nThe testator died in England on the 23rd January, 1900,\n\nand probate of his will was granted by the High Court of Justice Probate Division to the defendant on the 2nd May, 1900.\n\nAn exemplification of the probate was sealed with the seal of this Court in its Probate Jurisdiction on the 7th August 1900, and probate duty was paid on property of the estate in this Colony consisting of shares in various companies of the total value of £29,367.70.\n\nSince...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 491526,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "page_number": 67,
        "title": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "content_text": "Since this payment we made it has been ascertained that, in addition to these shares, the testator was entitled to the undermentioned parcels of shares namely:-\n\n(1). A parcel of 767 shares in the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, which were on the London Register of the Corporation and the Scrip or share certificates which were, at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the Corporation in London, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to £975.5s.6d.\n\nand\n\n(2). A parcel of 706 shares in the same Corporation which were on the Shanghai Register of the Corporation and were at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the Corporation at Shanghai, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to taels 252,412.72 (Shanghai Syce).\n\nThe Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation was incorporated in Hongkong by Ordinance No.5 of 1866 and exists and is governed by the provisions of that Ordinance and of the Deed of Settlement mentioned therein and of certain later Ordinances extending and amending the original Ordinance of Incorporation.\n\nThe Head Office of the Corporation is in Hongkong, and the business of the Corporation is managed and controlled by a Court of Directors in Hongkong. A Register of Shareholders is kept in Hongkong, a separate volume being opened and kept for Hongkong Shareholders, for English Shareholders, for Shanghai Shareholders and for Calcutta Shareholders respectively.\n\nSeparate registers have for many years past been opened and kept by the Corporation in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta for Shareholders in England, in China, and in India respectively. It appears that as far back as the 4th November, 1865, that is some time before the date of the Ordinance of Incorporation and of the Deed of Settlement - the managers and agents of the Corporation at these places were empowered by the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 491527,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "page_number": 68,
        "title": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "content_text": "66\n\nCourt of Directors to sign scrips for shares at their respective branches or agencies. On the 19th December 1867, the Court of Directors further authorised the special agent of the Corporation in London to get a duplicate seal of the Corporation made and to affix that seal to shares on, or to be put on, the London Register.\n\nShares held in the above mentioned countries have been habitually transferred on the local registers and share Certificates have been issued in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta to the transferees without any reference to the Court of Directors or to the Chief Manager in Hongkong. The Registers kept in Hongkong for shareholders resident in the said countries are merely transcripts of the local registers kept in London, at Shanghai and at Calcutta respectively, all transfers of shares being reported to Hongkong periodically by the local managers.\n\nIn these circumstances the plaintiff as representing the Crown claims from the defendant as Executrix of the testator payment of probate duty in Hongkong on the above mentioned 1,472 shares, on the ground that they are situate within the Probate Jurisdiction of this Court and therefore form part of the estate and effects of the testator upon which probate duty ought to be paid in this colony. The defendant, on the other hand, resists payment of the probate duty so claimed on the ground that the shares in question are not property locally situate in Hongkong, but are property situate in England and within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court at Shanghai respectively.\n\nThe defendant says that there is no express authority in the Ordinances constituting and affecting the Corporation or in the Corporation Deed of Settlement for the opening of the Registers in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta. The Corporation is not subject to the provisions of the Companies' Ordinances.\n\nIn this state of facts the following question is raised for the decision of the Court:- Whether the said 1,472 shares",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 491772,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "page_number": 313,
        "title": "CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4]",
        "content_text": "I have only recently met Zumar, a man likely to care profoundly and be versatile. I have recently met Potter, who is very attentive and must, of course, be good enough. He makes quite a fair income, but I am not sure about Zumar.\n\nCuriously, we have discussed Franz, one of the two handlers of the case, on the question of the protracted case, of which I was chairman. Considering that it is increasing and we are conducting it, it appears to be what we wanted. Both the Bar and the Summary Jurisdiction can do what is required.\n\nI was against it, which I thought was unkind. There is the Jitchbone Case. The plaintiff alleges he is a son named in the will; the defence states that the son in question died long ago. The case has been called the testator had two wives, largely due to the absence of both Sharp & Potter on holiday.\n\nThe case involves concubines and numerous natural and adopted children. It has involved stacks of expert evidence as to the validity of the will. The former returned later, obviously mortified by the repercussions of the alleged forgery. He was a sick man, and I am sorry to say that he died a fortnight ago, apparently due to the stress of the case.\n\nHis death leaves a serious gap in the firm, apart from his ability and experience. The usual lying in Chinese cases has been quite inspiriting, and the numbers are hard to stop, but when we were reduced to expostulating banities, it came to Alabaster, which is wholly inadequate.\n\nSharp's junior had a nervous breakdown and could not go on, which made the position very difficult. I have at once asked Leary to take the Will Case, an almost inferable task.\n\nPage 17",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-474 - Governor Sir Stubbs - 1922 [1-4].txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 498481,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-486 - Public Offices - 1924",
        "page_number": 150,
        "title": "CO129-486 - Public Offices - 1924",
        "content_text": "## 118 \n(1) Where a Court having jurisdiction in matters of probate or administration in China or elsewhere has granted probate or letters of administration or confirmation in respect of the estate of a deceased person, the probate, letters or confirmation so granted may, on being produced to, and a copy thereof deposited with, the Supreme Court, be sealed with the seal of that Court, and thereupon shall be of the like force and effect and have the same operation as if granted by that Court.\n\n(2) The Supreme Court may, also, if it thinks fit, on the application of any creditor, require before sealing that adequate security be given for the payment of debts due from the estate to creditors residing in China.\n\n(3) For the purposes of this Article, a duplicate of any probate, letters of administration, or confirmation sealed with the seal of the Court granting the same, or a copy thereof certified as correct by or under the authority of the Court granting the same, shall have the same effect as the original.\n\n## 119 \n(1) Where a British subject dies in China, or elsewhere, intestate, then, until administration is granted, his property in China shall be vested in the Judge of the Supreme Court.\n\n(2) The Court within whose jurisdiction any property of the deceased is situate shall, where the circumstances of the case appear to the Court so to require, forthwith on his death, or as soon after as may be, take possession of his property within the particular jurisdiction, or put any such property under the seal of the Court (in either case, if the nature of the property or other circumstances so require, making an inventory), and so keep it until it can be dealt with according to law.\n\n## 120 \nIf any person named executor in a will takes possession of, and administers or otherwise deals with any part of the property of the deceased, and does not obtain probate within one month after the death or after the termination of any proceedings respecting probate or administration, he shall be liable to pay double the amount of any fees chargeable on obtaining probate, and he shall also be liable to a fine not exceeding £100.\n\n## 121 \nIf any person, other than the person named executor or an administrator or an officer of the Court, takes possession of and administers or otherwise deals with any part of the property of a deceased British subject, whether resident or not, he shall be deemed guilty of a contempt of Court, and shall be liable to a fine not exceeding £50.\n\n## 122 \nWhere a person appointed executor in a will survives the testator, but either dies without having taken probate, or, having been called on by the Court to take probate, does not appear, his right in respect of the executorship wholly ceases; and without further renunciation the representation to the testator and the administration of his property shall go and may be committed as if that person had not been appointed executor.\n\n## 123 \n(1) Where a British subject dies in China, any other such subject having in his possession, or under his control, any paper or writing of the deceased, being or purporting to be testamentary, shall forthwith bring the original to the Court within whose particular jurisdiction the death happens, and deposit it there.\n\nIf any person fails to do so for fourteen days after having knowledge of the death of the deceased, he shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding £50.\n\n(2) Where it is proved that any paper of the deceased, being or purporting to be testamentary, is in the possession or under the control of a British subject, the Court may, whether a suit or proceeding respecting probate or administration is pending or not, order him to produce the paper and bring it into Court.\n\n(3) Where it appears to the Court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that any person has knowledge of any paper being, or purporting to be, testamentary (although it is not shown that the paper is in his possession or under his control) the Court may, whether a suit or proceeding for probate or administration is pending or not, order that he be examined respecting it before the Court or elsewhere, and that he do attend for that purpose, and after examination order that he do produce the paper and deposit it in Court.\n\n## 124 \nWhere it appears to the Court that the value of the property or estate of a deceased person does not exceed £100, the Court may, without any probate or letters of administration, or other formal proceeding, pay thereout any debts or charges, and pay, remit, or deliver any surplus to such persons, subject to such conditions (if any) as the Court thinks proper, and shall not be liable to any action, suit, or proceedings in respect of anything done under this Article. Provided that a Provincial Court shall not exercise the powers of this Article except with the approval of the Supreme Court. Every proceeding of the Court under this Article shall be recorded in the Minutes.\n\n## Distress for Rent\n\n## 125 \nAny person desirous of levying a distress for rent may apply to the Court to appoint a bailiff to levy such distress, and the Court may thereupon, and upon the applicant giving sufficient security to answer for any misconduct on the part of such bailiff, appoint a person to act as bailiff to levy such distress.\n\n## Appeals and Rehearings\n\n## 126 \n(1) Where an action in a Provincial Court involves the amount or value of £25 or upwards, any party aggrieved by any decision of that Court, with or without assessors, in the action shall have the right to appeal to the Full Court against the same, on such terms and conditions as may be prescribed by Rules of Court.\n\n(2) In any other case, the Provincial Court may, if it seems just and expedient, give leave to appeal on like terms.\n\n(3) In any case the Full Court may give leave to appeal on such terms as seem just.\n\nPage 150  \nPage 151",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-486 - Public Offices - 1924.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 506502,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-498-26 Marble Hall- bequest by Sir Paul Chater- Kt.- C.M.G- to the Hong Kong Government 23-11-1926 - 11-1-1927",
        "page_number": 2,
        "title": "CO129-498-26 Marble Hall- bequest by Sir Paul Chater- Kt.- C.M.G- to the Hong Kong Government 23-11-1926 - 11-1-1927",
        "content_text": "722 \n\nIn present circumstances it seems likely that Hong Kong cannot make up the place with money, but that as such would hardly be in accordance with the testator's intentions. It does not appear that they want the high officials of the Colony to have the house for their own use. It is liable to be offered to Aden. Duff despatches to Aden, asking whether they would wish to avail themselves of the offer in future.\n\n183 \n15/2 \n4/4/27 \n4.G.S.427 \n\n1. Scove \n2. Copy w/ong Photos to Admy cons- \n3. Remind Admy that `CR.DR.16/` \n4. To Sw. 84- \n\n- 6 APR 1927 \nA2 1682 also \n* 9 FEB 1927 \n301144/27 \n1 1 JAN 1927 1927 \n6 \n1778.14/4/27",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-498-26 Marble Hall- bequest by Sir Paul Chater- Kt.- C.M.G- to the Hong Kong Government 23-11-1926 - 11-1-1927.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 527157,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-529-5 China- extraterritoriality 23-11-1931 - 31-12-1931",
        "page_number": 70,
        "title": "CO129-529-5 China- extraterritoriality 23-11-1931 - 31-12-1931",
        "content_text": "## 91\n\n42 \n\nthe Supreme Court, be sealed with the seal of that Court, and thereupon shall be of the like force and effect and have the same operation as if granted by that Court.\n\n(2) The Supreme Court may, if it thinks fit, on the application of any creditor, require before sealing that adequate security be given for the payment of debts due from the estate to creditors residing in Egypt.\n\n109. (1) Each Consular Officer shall endeavour to obtain, as early as may be, notice of the death of every British subject, whether resident or not, dying within his jurisdiction, and all such information respecting his affairs as may serve to guide the Court with respect to the securing and administration of his property.\n\n(2) On receiving notice of the death the Consular Officer shall put up a notice thereof at the Court-house, and shall keep the same there until probate or letters of administration are granted, or, where it appears to him that probate or letters of administration will not be applied for or cannot be granted, for such time as he thinks fit.\n\n110. (1) Where a British subject dies in Egypt or elsewhere intestate, then, until administration is granted, his personal property in Egypt shall vest in the Judge of the Supreme Court.\n\n(2) In any case where it appears to the Court within whose jurisdiction any property of a deceased is situated that the circumstances of the case so require, the Court shall, as soon as possible after his death, take possession of such property within its jurisdiction, or put any such property under the seal of the Court and shall, if the nature of the property or other circumstances so require, direct an inventory of any such property to be made and shall keep such property in its possession or under its seal until such property can be dealt with according to law.\n\n111. If any person named executor in a will takes possession of and administers or otherwise deals with any part of the property of the deceased, and does not obtain probate within one month after the death or after the termination of any proceedings respecting probate or administration, he shall be liable to pay double the amount of any fees chargeable on obtaining probate, and he shall also be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds.\n\n112. If any person, other than an executor or an administrator or an officer of the Court, takes possession of and administers or otherwise deals with any part of the personal property of a deceased British subject, whether resident or not, he shall be deemed guilty of a contempt of Court, and shall be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds.\n\n113. Where a person appointed executor in a will survives the testator, but either dies without having taken probate or, having been called on by the Court to take probate, does not appear, his right in respect of the executorship wholly ceases; and, without further renunciation, the representation to the testator and the administration of his property shall go and may be committed as if that person had not been appointed executor.\n\n## 43\n\n114. (1) Where a British subject dies in Egypt, any other person subject to this Order having in his possession, or under his control, any paper or writing of the deceased, being, or purporting to be, testamentary, shall forthwith bring the original to the Court within whose jurisdiction the death happens and deposit it there. If any such person fails to do so for fourteen days after having knowledge of the death of the deceased, he shall be guilty of an offence, and liable to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds.\n\n(2) Where it is proved that any paper of the deceased, being or purporting to be testamentary, is in the possession or under the control of a British subject, the Court may, whether a suit or proceeding respecting probate or administration is pending or not, order him to produce the paper and bring it into Court.\n\n(3) Where it appears to the Court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that any person has knowledge of any paper, being or purporting to be testamentary, (although it is not shown that the paper is in his possession or under his control), the Court may, whether a suit or proceeding for probate or administration is pending or not, order that he be examined respecting it before the Court or elsewhere, and that he do attend for that purpose, and after examination order that he do produce the paper and deposit it in Court.\n\n115. Where it appears to the Court that the value of the property or estate of a deceased person does not exceed one hundred pounds, the Court may, without any probate or letters of administration, or other formal proceeding, pay thereout any debts or charges, and pay, remit, or deliver any surplus to such persons, subject to such conditions (if any) as the Court thinks proper, and no Judge or officer of the Court shall be liable to any action, suit, or proceedings in respect of anything done under this Article. Every proceeding of the Court under this Article shall be recorded in the Minutes, as if the matter were a civil action.\n\n116. Section 51 of the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act, 1874(a) is hereby extended to Egypt, with the adaptation following, namely: The Supreme Court is hereby substituted for a Court of Probate in a Colony.\n\n(a) 37-8 V. c. 94.\n\n## 92\n\nPage 70\nPage 71",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-529-5 China- extraterritoriality 23-11-1931 - 31-12-1931.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 537031,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-543-16 China- protection for Anglo-Chinese 13-2-1933 - 13-3-1934",
        "page_number": 42,
        "title": "CO129-543-16 China- protection for Anglo-Chinese 13-2-1933 - 13-3-1934",
        "content_text": "## 119.-(1) \nWhere a British subject dies in China, or elsewhere, intestate, then, until administration is granted, his property in China shall be vested in the Judge of the Supreme Court.\n\n(2) The Court within whose jurisdiction any property of the deceased is situate shall, where the circumstances of the case appear to the Court so to require, forthwith on his death, or as soon after as may be, take possession of his property within the particular jurisdiction, or put any such property under the seal of the Court (in either case, if the nature of the property or other circumstances so require, making an inventory), and so keep it until it can be dealt with according to law.\n\n## 120. \nIf any person named executor in a will takes possession of, and administers or otherwise deals with any part of the property of the deceased, and does not obtain probate within one month after the death or after the termination of any proceedings respecting probate or administration, he shall be liable to pay double the amount of any fees chargeable on obtaining probate, and he shall also be liable to a fine not exceeding £100.\n\n## 121. \nIf any person, other than the person named executor or an administrator or an officer of the Court, takes possession of and administers or otherwise deals with any part of the property of a deceased British subject, whether resident or not, he shall be deemed guilty of a contempt of Court, and shall be liable to a fine not exceeding £50.\n\n## 122. \nWhere a person appointed executor in a will survives the testator, but either dies without having taken probate, or, having been called on by the Court to take probate, does not appear, his right in respect of the executorship wholly ceases; and without further renunciation the representation to the testator and the administration of his property shall go and may be committed as if that person had not been appointed executor.\n\n## 123.-(1) \nWhere a British subject dies in China, any other such subject having in his possession, or under his control, any paper or writing of the deceased, being or purporting to be testamentary, shall forthwith bring the original to the Court within whose particular jurisdiction the death happens, and deposit it there. If any person fails to do so for fourteen days after having knowledge of the death of the deceased, he shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding £50.\n\n(2) Where it is proved that any paper of the deceased, being or purporting to be testamentary, is in the possession or under the control of a British subject, the Court may, whether a suit or proceeding respecting probate or administration is pending or not, order him to produce the paper and bring it into Court.\n\n(3) Where it appears to the Court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that any person has knowledge of any paper being, or purporting to be, testamentary (although it is not shown that the paper is in his possession or under his control) the Court may, whether a suit or proceeding for probate or administration is pending or not, order that he be examined respecting it before the Court or elsewhere, and that he do attend for that purpose, and after examination order that he do produce the paper and deposit it in Court.\n\n## 124. \nWhere it appears to the Court that the value of the property or estate of a deceased person does not exceed £100, the Court may, without any probate or letters of administration, or other formal proceeding, pay thereout any debts or charges, and pay, remit, or deliver any surplus to such persons, subject to such conditions (if any) as the Court thinks proper, and shall not be liable to any action, suit, or proceedings in respect of anything done under this Article. Provided that a Provincial Court shall not exercise the powers of this Article except with the approval of the Supreme Court. Every proceeding of the Court under this Article shall be recorded in the Minutes.\n\n## Distress for Rent\n## 125. \nAny person desirous of levying a distress for rent may apply to the Court to appoint a bailiff to levy such distress, and the Court may thereupon, and upon the applicant giving sufficient security to answer for any misconduct on the part of such bailiff, appoint a person to act as bailiff to levy such distress.\n\n## Appeals and Rehearings\n## 126.-(1) \nWhere an action in a Provincial Court involves the amount or value of £25 or upwards, any party aggrieved by any decision of that Court, with or without assessors, in the action shall have the right to appeal to the Full Court against the same, on such terms and conditions as may be prescribed by Rules of Court.\n\n(2) In any other case, the Provincial Court may, if it seems just and expedient, give leave to appeal on like terms.\n\n(3) In any case the Full Court may give leave to appeal on such terms as seem just.\n\nPage 57\nPage 38\nPage 39\nPage 58",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-543-16 China- protection for Anglo-Chinese 13-2-1933 - 13-3-1934.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 545305,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "page_number": 9,
        "title": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "content_text": "## General Powers of Trustees and Personal Representatives\n\n### General Powers\n\n13. (1) Where a trust for sale or a power of sale of property is vested in a trustee, he may sell or concur with any other person in selling all or any part of the property, either subject to prior charges or not, and either together or in lots, by public auction or by private contract, subject to any such conditions respecting title or evidence of title or other matter as the trustee thinks fit, with power to vary any contract for sale, and to buy in at any auction, or to rescind any contract for sale and to resell, without being answerable for any loss.\n\n(2) A trust or power to sell or dispose of land includes a trust or power to sell or dispose of part thereof, whether the division is horizontal, vertical, or made in any other way.\n\n14. (1) No sale made by a trustee shall be impeached by any beneficiary upon the ground that any of the conditions subject to which the sale was made may have been unnecessarily depreciatory, unless it also appears that the consideration for the sale was thereby rendered inadequate.\n\n(2) No sale made by a trustee shall, after the execution of the conveyance, be impeached as against the purchaser upon the ground that any of the conditions subject to which the sale was made may have been unnecessarily depreciatory, unless it appears that the purchaser was acting in collusion with the trustee at the time when the contract for sale was made.\n\n(3) No purchaser, upon any sale made by a trustee, shall be at liberty to make any objection against the title upon any of the grounds aforesaid.\n\n(4) This section applies to sales made before or after the commencement of this Ordinance.\n\n15. (1) The receipt in writing of a trustee for any money, securities, or other personal property or effects payable, transferable, or deliverable to him under any trust or power shall be a sufficient discharge to the person paying, transferring, or delivering the same and shall effectually exonerate him from seeing to the application or being answerable for any loss or misapplication thereof.\n\n(2) This section does not, except where the trustee is a trust corporation, enable a sole trustee to give a valid receipt for the proceeds of sale or other capital money arising under a trust for sale of land.\n\n(3) This section applies notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the instrument, if any, creating the trust.\n\n16. A personal representative, or two or more trustees acting together, or, subject to the restrictions imposed in regard to receipts by a sole trustee not being a trust corporation, a sole acting trustee where by the instrument, if any, creating the trust, or by statute, a sole trustee is authorised to execute the trusts and powers reposed in him, may, if and as he or they think fit-\n\n(a) accept any property, before the time at which it is made transferable or payable; or\n\n(b) sever and apportion any blended trust funds or property; or\n\n(c) pay or allow any debt or claim on any evidence that he or they think sufficient; or\n\n(d) accept any composition or any security, for any debt, or for any property, claimed; or\n\n(e) allow any time for payment of any debt; or\n\ncompromise, compound, abandon, submit to arbitration or otherwise settle any debt, account claim or thing whatever relating to the testator's or intestate's estate or to the trust;\n\nand for any of those purposes may enter into, give, execute and do such agreements, instruments of composition or arrangement, releases, and other things as to him or them seem expedient, without being responsible for any loss occasioned by any act or thing so done by him or them in good faith.\n\n17. (1) A trustee of any leaseholds for lives or years which are renewable from time to time either under any covenant or contract, or by custom or usual practice, may, if he thinks fit, and shall, if thereto required by any person having any beneficial interest, present or future, or contingent, in the leaseholds, for the use and purpose of renewing the lease, use his best endeavours to obtain from time to time a renewed lease of the same hereditaments on the accustomed and reasonable terms, and for that purpose may from time to time make or concur in making a surrender of the lease for the time being subsisting, and do all such other acts as are requisite; provided that, where by the terms of the settlement or will the person in possession for his life or other limited interest is entitled to enjoy the same without any obligation to renew or to contribute to the expense of renewal, this section shall not apply unless the consent in writing of that person is obtained to the renewal on the part of the trustee.\n\n(2) If money is required to pay for the renewal, the trustee affecting the renewal may pay the same out of any money then in his hands in trust for the persons beneficially interested in the lands to be comprised in the renewal lease, and if he has not in his hands sufficient money for the purpose he may raise the money required by mortgage of the hereditaments to be comprised in the renewed lease, or of any other hereditaments for the time being subject to the uses or trusts to which those hereditaments are subject, and no person advancing money upon a mortgage purporting to be under this power shall be bound to see that the money is wanted, or that no more is raised than is wanted for the purpose, or otherwise as to the application thereof.\n\n(3) This section applies to trusts created either before or after the commencement of this Ordinance, but nothing in this section shall authorise any trustee to do anything which he is in express terms forbidden to do, or to omit to do anything which he is in express terms directed to do, by the instrument creating the trust.\n\n18. (1) Where trustees are authorised by the instrument, if any, creating the trust or by law to pay or apply capital money subject to the trust for any purpose or in any manner, they shall have and shall be deemed always to have had power to raise the money required by sale, conversion, calling in, or mortgage of all or any part of the trust property for the time being in possession.\n\n(2) This section applies notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the instrument, if any, creating the trust, but does not apply to trustees of property held for charitable purposes.\n\n19. No purchaser or mortgagee, paying or advancing money on a sale or mortgage purporting to be made under any trust or power vested in trustees, shall be concerned to see that such money is wanted, or that no more than is wanted is raised, or otherwise as to the application thereof.\n\n20. (1) Where a power or trust is given to or imposed on two or more trustees jointly, the same may be exercised or performed by the survivors or survivor of them for the time being.\n\n(2) Until the appointment of new trustees, the personal representatives or representative for the time being of a sole trustee, or, where there were two or more trustees, of the last surviving or continuing trustee, shall be capable of exercising or performing any power or trust which was given to, or capable of being exercised by, the sole or last surviving or continuing trustee, or other the trustees or trustee for the time being of the trust.\n\n(3) This section takes effect subject to the restrictions imposed in regard to receipts by a sole trustee, not being a trust corporation.\n\n(4) In this section \"personal representative\" does not include an executor who has renounced or has not proved.\n\n21. (1) A trustee may insure against loss or damage by fire and typhoon any building or other insurable property to any amount, including the amount of any insurance already on foot, up to the full value of the building or property, and pay the premiums for such insurance out of the income thereof or out of the income of any other property subject to the same trusts without obtaining the consent of any person who may be entitled wholly or partly to such income.\n\n(2) This section does not apply to any building or property which a trustee is bound forthwith to convey absolutely to any beneficiary upon being requested to do so.\n\n22. (1) Money receivable by trustees or any beneficiary under a policy of insurance against the loss or damage of any property subject to a trust, whether by fire or otherwise, shall, where the policy has been kept up under any trust in that behalf or under any power statutory or otherwise, or in performance of any covenant or of any obligation statutory or otherwise, or by a tenant for life impeachable for waste, be capital money for the purpose of the trust as the case may be.\n\n(2) If any such money is receivable by any person, other than the trustees of the trust, that person shall use his best endeavours to recover and receive the money, and shall pay the net residue thereof after discharging any costs of recovering and receiving it, to the trustees of the trust, or, if there are no trustees capable of giving a discharge therefor, into court.\n\n(3) Any such money-\n\n(a) if it was receivable in respect of property held upon trust for sale, shall be held upon the trusts and subject to the powers and provisions applicable to money arising by a sale under such trust;\n\nPage 12\n\nPage 11",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 545307,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "page_number": 12,
        "title": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "content_text": "## 25.-(1) Trustees or personal representatives may, instead of acting personally, employ and pay an agent, whether a solicitor, banker, stockbroker, or other person, to transact any business or do any act required to be transacted or done in the execution of the trust, or the administration of the testator's or intestate's estate, including the receipt and payment of money, and shall be entitled to be allowed and paid all charges and expenses so incurred, and shall not be responsible for the default of any such agent if employed in good faith.\n\n## (2) Trustees or personal representatives may appoint any person to act as their agent or attorney for the purpose of selling, converting, collecting, getting in, and executing and perfecting insurances of, or managing or cultivating, or otherwise administering any property, movable or immovable, subject to the trust or forming part of the testator's or intestate's estate, in any place outside the Colony, or executing or exercising any discretion or trust or power vested in them in relation to any such property, with such ancillary powers, and with and subject to such provisions and restrictions as they may think fit, including a power to appoint substitutes, and shall not, by reason only of their having made such appointment, be responsible for any loss arising thereby.\n\n## (3) Without prejudice to such general power of appointing agents as aforesaid—\n\n**(a)** a trustee may appoint a solicitor to be his agent to receive and give a discharge for any money or valuable consideration or property receivable by the trustee under the trust, by permitting the solicitor to have the custody of, and to produce, a deed having in the body thereof or endorsed thereon a receipt for such money or valuable consideration or property, the deed being executed, or the endorsed receipt being signed, by the person entitled to give a receipt for that consideration;\n\n**(b)** a trustee shall not be chargeable with breach of trust by reason only of his having made or concurred in making any such appointment; and the production of any such deed by the solicitor shall have the same statutory validity and effect as if the person appointing the solicitor had not been a trustee;\n\n**(c)** a trustee may appoint a banker or solicitor to be his agent to receive and give a discharge for any money payable to the trustee under or by virtue of a policy of insurance, by permitting the banker or solicitor to have the custody of and to produce the policy of insurance with a receipt signed by the trustee, and a trustee shall not be chargeable with a breach of trust by reason only of his having made or concurred in making any such appointment:\n\nProvided that nothing in this sub-section shall exempt a trustee from any liability which he would have incurred if this Ordinance and any enactment replaced by this Ordinance had not been passed, in case he permits any such money, valuable consideration, or property to remain in the hands or under the control of the banker or solicitor for a period longer than is reasonably necessary to enable the banker or solicitor, as the case may be, to pay or transfer the same to the trustee.\n\nThis sub-section applies whether the money or valuable consideration or property was or is received before or after the commencement of this Ordinance.\n\n## 26. Where an undivided share in the proceeds of sale of land directed to be sold, or in any other property, is subject to a trust, or forms part of the estate of a testator or intestate, the trustees or personal representatives may (without prejudice to the trust for sale affecting the entirety of the land and the powers of the trustees for sale in reference thereto) execute or exercise any trust or power vested in them in relation to such share in conjunction with the persons entitled to or having power in that behalf over the other share or shares, and notwithstanding that any one or more of the trustees or personal representatives may be entitled to or interested in any such other share, either in his or their own right or in a fiduciary capacity.\n\n## 27.-(1) A trustee intending to remain out of the Colony for a period exceeding one month may, notwithstanding any rule of law or equity to the contrary, by power of attorney, delegate to any person (including a trust corporation) the execution or exercise during his absence from the Colony of all or any trusts, powers and discretions vested in him as such trustee, either alone or jointly with any other person or persons:\n\nProvided that a person being the only other co-trustee and not being a trust corporation shall not be appointed to be an attorney under this sub-section.\n\n## (2) The donor of a power of attorney given under this section shall be liable for the acts or defaults of the donee in the same manner as if they were the acts or defaults of the donor.\n\n## (3) The power of attorney shall not come into operation unless and until the donor is out of the Colony and shall be revoked by his return.\n\n## (4) The power of attorney shall be attested by at least one witness, and shall be deposited in the Registry of the Supreme Court within ten days after the execution thereof, or where not executed in the Colony, within ten days after the time at which it is first received in the Colony.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 545309,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "page_number": 14,
        "title": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "content_text": "## 13 \n\n(1) He may distribute the residuary estate of the deceased testator or intestate, or, as the case may be, the trust estate (other than the fund, if any, set apart as aforesaid) to or amongst the persons entitled thereto, without appropriating any part, or any further part, as the case may be, of the estate of the deceased or of the trust estate to meet any future liability under the said lease or grant;\n\n(ii) notwithstanding such distribution, he shall not be personally liable in respect of any subsequent claim under the said lease or grant.\n\n(2) This section operates without prejudice to the right of the lessor or grantor, or the persons deriving title under the lessor or grantor, to follow the assets of the deceased or the trust property into the hands of the persons amongst whom the same may have been respectively distributed, and applies notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the will or other instrument, if any, creating the trust.\n\n(3) In this section \"lease\" includes an underlease and an agreement for a lease or underlease and any instrument giving any such indemnity as aforesaid or varying the liabilities under the lease; \"grant\" applies to a grant whether the rent is created by limitation, grant, reservation, or otherwise, and includes an agreement for a grant and any instrument giving any such indemnity as aforesaid or varying the liabilities under the grant; \"lessee\" and \"grantee\" include persons respectively deriving title under them.\n\n## 29.—(1) With a view to the conveyance to or distribution among the persons entitled to any movable or immovable property, trustees or personal representatives may give notice by advertisement in the Gazette, and such other like notices, including notices elsewhere than in the Colony, as would, in any special case, have been directed by a court of competent jurisdiction in an action for administration, of their intention to make such conveyance or distribution as aforesaid, and requiring any person interested to send to the trustees or personal representatives within the time, not being less than two months, fixed in the notice or, where more than one notice is given, in the last of the notices, particulars of his claim in respect of the property or any part thereof to which the notice relates.\n\n(2) At the expiration of the time fixed by the notice the trustees or personal representatives may convey or distribute the property or any part thereof to which the notice relates, to or among the persons entitled thereto, having regard only to the claims, whether formal or not, of which the trustees or personal representatives then had notice and shall not, as respects the property so conveyed or distributed, be liable to any person of whose claim the trustees or personal representatives have not had notice at the time of conveyance or distribution; but nothing in this section shall-\n\n(a) prejudice the right of any person to follow the property, or any property representing the same, into the hands of any person, other than a purchaser, who may have received it;\n\nor\n\n(b) free the trustees or personal representatives from any obligation to make searches similar to those which an intending purchaser would be advised to make or obtain.\n\n(3) This section applies notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the will or other instrument, if any, creating the trust.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 545313,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "page_number": 18,
        "title": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "content_text": "## 18\n\n(1) Where a trustee, either original or substituted, and whether appointed by a court or otherwise, is dead, or remains out of the Colony for more than twelve months, or desires to be discharged from all or any of the trusts or powers reposed in or conferred on him, or refuses or is unfit to act therein, or is incapable of acting therein, or is an infant, then and in any such case the person or persons nominated for the purpose of appointing new trustees by the instrument, if any, creating the trust, or if there is no such person, or no such person able and willing to act, then the surviving or continuing trustee or trustees for the time being, or the personal representatives of the last surviving or continuing trustee, may, by writing, appoint one or more other persons (whether or not being the persons exercising the power) to be a trustee or trustees in the place of the trustee so deceased, remaining out of the Colony, desiring to be discharged, refusing, or being unfit or being incapable, or being an infant, as aforesaid.\n\n(2) Where a trustee has been removed under a power contained in the instrument creating the trust, a new trustee or new trustees may be appointed in the place of the trustee who is removed, as if he were dead, or, in the case of a corporation, as if the corporation desired to be discharged from the trust, and the provisions of this section shall apply accordingly, but subject to the restrictions imposed by this Ordinance on the number of trustees.\n\n(3) Where a corporation being a trustee is or has been dissolved, either before or after the commencement of this Ordinance, then, for the purposes of this section and of any enactment replaced thereby, the corporation shall be deemed to be and to have been from the date of the dissolution incapable of acting in the trusts or powers reposed in or conferred on the corporation.\n\n(4) The power of appointment given by sub-section (1) of this section or any similar previous enactment to the personal representatives of a last surviving or continuing trustee shall be and shall be deemed always to have been exercisable by the executors for the time being (whether original or by representation) of such surviving or continuing trustee who have proved the will of their testator or by the administrators for the time being of such trustee without the concurrence of any executor who has renounced or has not proved.\n\n(5) But a sole or last surviving executor intending to renounce, or all the executors where they all intend to renounce, shall have and shall be deemed always to have had power, at any time before renouncing probate, to exercise the power of appointment given by this section, or by any similar previous enactment, if willing to act for that purpose and without thereby accepting the office of executor.\n\n(6) Where a sole trustee, other than a trust corporation, is or has been originally appointed to act in a trust, or where, in the case of any trust, there are not more than three trustees (none of them being a trust corporation) either original or substituted and whether appointed by the court or otherwise, then and in any such case-\n(a) the person or persons nominated for the purpose of appointing new trustees by the instrument, if any, creating the trust; or\n(b) if there is no such person, or no such person able and willing to act, then the trustee or trustees for the time being;\nmay, by writing, appoint another person or other persons to be an additional trustee or additional trustees, but it shall not be obligatory to appoint any additional trustee, unless the instrument, if any, creating the trust, or any statutory enactment provides to the contrary, nor shall the number of trustees be increased beyond four by virtue of any such appointment.\n\n(7) Every new trustee appointed under this section, as well before as after all the trust property becomes by law, or by assurance, or otherwise, vested in him, shall have the same powers, authorities, and discretions, and may in all respects act as if he had been originally appointed a trustee by the instrument, if any, creating the trust.\n\n## 19\n\n(8) The provisions of this section relating to a trustee who is dead include the case of a person nominated trustee in a will but dying before the testator, and those relative to a continuing trustee include a refusing or retiring trustee, if willing to act in the execution of the provisions of this section.\n\n(9) Where a lunatic or person of unsound mind, being a trustee, is also entitled in possession to some beneficial interest in the trust property, no appointment of a new trustee in his place shall be made by the continuing trustees or trustee, under this section, unless leave has been given by the court to make the appointment.\n\n## 38\n\n**(1) Supplemental provisions as to appointment of trustees.**\n(a) the number of trustees may, subject to the restrictions imposed by this Ordinance on the number of trustees, be increased; and\n(b) a separate set of trustees, not exceeding four, may be appointed for any part of the trust property held on trusts distinct from those relating to any other part or parts of the trust property, notwithstanding that no new trustees or trustee are or is to be appointed for other parts of the trust property, and any existing trustee may be appointed or remain one of such separate set of trustees, or, if only one trustee was originally appointed, then, save as hereinafter provided, one separate trustee may be appointed; and\n(c) it shall not be obligatory, save as hereinafter provided, to appoint more than one trustee where only one trustee was originally appointed, or to fill up the original number of trustees where more than two trustees were originally appointed, but, except where only one trustee was originally appointed, and a sole trustee when appointed will be able to give valid receipts for all capital money, a trustee shall not be discharged from his trust unless there will be either a trust corporation or at least two individuals to act as trustees to perform the trust; and\n(d) any assurance or thing requisite for vesting the trust property, or any part thereof, in a sole trustee, or jointly in the persons who are the trustees, shall be executed or done.\n\n(2) Nothing in this Ordinance shall authorise the appointment of a sole trustee, not being a trust corporation, where the trustee, when appointed, would not be able to give valid receipts for all capital money arising under the trust.\n\n## 39\n\n**(1) Evidence as to a vacancy in a trust.**\nA statement, contained in any instrument coming into operation after the commencement of this Ordinance by which a new trustee is appointed for any purpose connected with land, to the effect that a trustee has remained out of the Colony for more than twelve months or refuses or is unfit to act, or is incapable of acting, or that he is not entitled to a beneficial interest in the trust property in possession, shall, in favour of a purchaser of a legal estate, be conclusive evidence of the matter stated.\n\n(2) In favour of such purchaser any appointment of a new trustee depending on that statement, and any vesting declaration, express or implied, consequent on the appointment, shall be valid.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 545320,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "page_number": 25,
        "title": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "content_text": "## PART VI. \n### THE JUDICIAL TRUSTEE.\n\n63.-(1) Where application is made to the court by or on behalf of the person creating or intending to create a trust, or by or on behalf of a trustee or beneficiary, the court may, in its discretion, appoint a person (in this Part of this Ordinance called a judicial trustee) to be a trustee of that trust, either jointly with any other person or as sole trustee, and, if sufficient cause is shown, in place of all or any existing trustees.\n\n(2) The administration of the property of a deceased person, whether a testator or intestate, shall be a trust, and the executor or administrator a trustee, within the meaning of this Part of this Ordinance.\n\n(3) Any fit and proper person nominated for the purpose in the application may be appointed a judicial trustee, and, in the absence of such nomination, or if the court is not satisfied of the fitness of a person so nominated, an official of the court may be appointed, and in any case a judicial trustee shall be subject to the control and supervision of the court as an officer thereof.\n\n(4) The court may, either on request or without request, give to a judicial trustee any general or special directions in regard to the trust or the administration thereof.\n\n(5) There may be paid to the judicial trustee out of the trust property such remuneration, not exceeding any prescribed limits, as the court may assign in each case, subject to any rules under this Part of this Ordinance respecting the application of such remuneration where the judicial trustee is an official of the court, and the remuneration so assigned to any judicial trustee shall, save as the court may for special reasons otherwise order, cover all his work and personal outlay.\n\n(6) Once in every year the accounts of every trust of which a judicial trustee has been appointed shall be audited, and a report thereon made to the court by such persons as may be prescribed, and, in any case where the court shall so direct, an inquiry into the administration by a judicial trustee of any trust, or into any dealing or transaction of a judicial trustee, shall be made in such manner as may be prescribed.\n\n64.-(1) The Chief Justice may with the approval of the Legislative Council make rules for carrying into effect this Part of this Ordinance and especially:-\n\n| Clause | Description |\n|---------|-------------|\n| (a)     | for requiring judicial trustees, who are not officials of the court, to give security for the due application of any trust property under their control; |\n| (b)     | respecting the safety of the trust property, and the custody thereof; |\n| (c)     | respecting the remuneration of judicial trustees and for fixing and regulating the fees to be taken under this Part of this Ordinance so as to cover the expenses of the administration of this Part of this Ordinance, and respecting the payment of such remuneration and fees out of the trust property, and, where the judicial trustee is an official of the court, respecting the application of the remuneration and fees payable to him; |\n| (d)     | for dispensing with formal proof of facts in proper cases; |",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 545325,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "page_number": 30,
        "title": "CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934",
        "content_text": "## Ordinance No. 39 of 1932\n\n### Section 8\n\nTo be the custodian on such terms as are agreed upon of any moneys, securities, jewellery, plate or other valuable property and of papers, documents, deeds, wills, debentures and other evidence of title or indebtedness;\n\n(g) to receive and manage any sinking, redemption, guarantee or any other special fund or deposit and to act as agent for countersigning, registering or otherwise ascertaining and certifying to the genuineness of any issue of shares, stocks, bonds, debentures or other securities for money of any Government, Municipal or other corporate body or of any association, whether incorporated or not, duly authorised to issue and make such issue and to hold any such securities as agent or trustee and to act generally as agent for any such Government, Municipal or corporate body or association;\n\n(h) to acquire and hold immovable property for the actual use and occupation of the company or any of its officers and servants and to erect, construct, enlarge, alter and maintain any buildings necessary or convenient for the said purposes and to sell or otherwise dispose of any such immovable property if not required for the said purposes;\n\n(i) to hold land which having been mortgaged to the company is acquired by it for the protection of its investments; and from time to time sell, mortgage, lease or otherwise dispose thereof;\n\n(j) to deposit the moneys of the company not immediately required with any bank or banks at interest until such moneys can be more permanently invested and to invest the moneys of the company in accordance with the provisions of section 92;\n\n(k) to borrow moneys and secure the repayment thereof with interest in accordance with the provisions of section 94;\n\n(l) to receive and collect such remuneration for its services as is agreed upon or as fixed or allowed from time to time by law and all usual and customary charges, costs and expenses.\n\n(m) to support and subscribe to any charitable or public object and any institution, society or club which may be for the benefit of the company or its employees or may be connected with any town or place where the company carries on business; to give pensions, gratuities or charitable aid to any person or persons who may serve or have served the company or to the wives, children or other relatives of such persons; to make payments towards insurance and to form and contribute to provident and benefit funds for the benefit of any persons employed by the company:\n\nProvided that no such subscription, gift, payment or contribution shall be given or made, except out of profits of the company available for distribution as dividend;\n\n(n) to carry on within the limits of the China Order in Council, 1925 (and any Orders amending, read with, auxiliary to or substituted for the same), but not elsewhere outside the Colony, any business or to hold any office which a Trust Company is by this Ordinance authorised to carry on or to hold in the Colony;\n\n(o) to acquire and undertake the whole or any part of the business of any person or company of a like nature to any business which a Trust Company is authorised to carry on and in consideration for such acquisition to undertake all or any of the liabilities of such person or company and to issue shares to such person or company.\n\n(p) to do all such other things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the before-mentioned objects or any of them.\n\n(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorise any Trust Company to engage in the business of banking or of insurance or the business of a deposit, provident or benefit society.\n\n(3) No Trust Company shall carry on any business or execute any office other than the businesses or offices included in the objects set out in sub-section (1).\n\n## Section 83\n\nIf at any time a Trust Company shall be appointed executor of the will of any testator, it shall be lawful for the company to apply to the court for probate of the will and if probate be granted, to exercise and discharge all the powers and duties of an executor.\n\n## Section 84\n\n(1) If and whenever any person shall be entitled to apply for probate of the will of any testator without leave being reserved to any other person to apply for probate, it shall be lawful for such person, whether absent from the Colony or not, and notwithstanding the provisions of any other enactment, instead of himself applying for such probate, to authorise a Trust Company to apply to the court for a grant of administration with the will annexed of the estate of such testator, and such grant may be made to the Trust Company upon its own application, when so authorised, but the provisions of this section shall not apply to any case in which a will provides that a company shall not act as executor or in the trusts thereof.\n\n(2) If and whenever any person shall be entitled to apply for letters of administration with the will of any testator annexed of the estate of such testator, it shall be lawful for such person, whether absent from the Colony or not, and notwithstanding the provisions of any other enactment, to authorise a Trust Company, either alone, or jointly with any other person, to apply to the court for a grant of letters of administration with the will annexed of the estate of such testator, and such grant may be made to the company upon its own application when so authorised, but the provisions of this section shall not apply to a case in which a will provides that a company shall not act as executor, or in the trusts thereof.\n\n(3) It shall be lawful for any person or persons entitled to apply for administration of the estate of any intestate, whether such person or persons be absent from the Colony or not, and notwithstanding the provisions of any other enactment, to authorise a Trust Company to apply to the court for such letters of administration, either alone or jointly with any other person, and administration of the estate of any such intestate may be granted to the company either alone or jointly as aforesaid, upon its own application, when so authorised.\n\n(4) For the purposes of any application to the court for letters of administration to the estate of any deceased person, the court shall consider a Trust Company, when authorised as aforesaid, to be in law entitled, equally with any other person or class of persons.\n\nPage 30\nPage 31",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-548-9 Trustee Ordinance 1934 21-7-1934 - 1-8-1934.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550739,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 25,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "BURCHELLS.\n\nC.T.D.BURCHELL.\n\nA.W.BURCHELL.\n\n24\n\n5, The Sanctuary,\n\nWestminster, S.W. 1.\n\nTELEPHONE - ABBEY 3108 (2 LINES)\n\nCop kept at I.R.\n\nPLEASE ADDRESS YOUR REPLY TO\n\nTHE FIRM AND REFER TO INITIAL.\n\nM.\n\n10th July 1936\n\nSir,\n\nPor\n\nWe have been instructed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to inquire if you would be willing to supply him with certain information as to the practice of your Department with regard to the assessment of Estate Duty in circumstances similar to those set out below. The matter in question has arisen in one of the Crown Colonies in which the Estate Duty law (as far as this particular point is concerned) is exactly similar to that in force in England. An Appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is at present contemplated and, before any further steps are taken, the Secretary of State wishes to be informed of the English Estate Duty Office practice.\n\nBy his Will dated the 17th April 1925, the Testator bequeathed an annuity or annual sum of £10,000 sterling to his wife during her life clear of all death duties and income tax. He gave his Trustees a power of appropriation by Clause 13 of his Will which reads as follows :-\n\n\"13. I declare that my Trustees shall be at liberty if they so think fit to appropriate and set apart out of my residuary estate investments representing such a capital fund as shall at the time of appropriation be sufficient to produce the annual sums directed to be paid by Clause 5 of this my Will with such a liberal margin for contingencies as in the opinion of my Trustees shall be sufficient And I declare that when such appropriation has been made the said annual sums shall be wholly charged on the investments so appropriated in exoneration\n\nThe Controller, Estate Duty Office.\n\n1.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550740,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 26,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "FROM\n\n25\n\nBURCHELLS,\n\nLETTER TO\n\nThe Controller, Estate Duty Office.\n\nSHEET NO.\n\n2\n\nDATE\n\n10.7.36.\n\nof the rest of my estate but that the capital of such appropriated investments may be resorted to in case at any time the income thereof is insufficient to pay any such annual sum or sums And I further declare that on the cesser of any such annual sums such part of the appropriated investments as shall not in the opinion of my Trustees be required for the payment of the other annual sum or sums for the time being payable under the trusts of this my Will shall revert to and form part of my residuary estate and that any surplus income arising from the appropriated investments shall be applied as income of my residuary estate\".\n\nBy Clause 8 of his Will the Testator made the following provision with regard to investment :-\n\n\"8. Subject to the payment of my funeral and testamentary expenses and debts and any legacies bequeathed by this my Will or by any Codicil hereto and the duty (if any) upon legacies and annuities bequeathed free of duty and subject to making provision for the payment of any annuities bequeathed by this my Will or any Codicil hereto my Trustees shall invest in manner hereinafter authorised the proceeds of the said sale calling in and conversion and stand possessed of such investments and of such parts of my residuary estate as shall at my death consist of such investments as are hereinafter authorised (which said net proceeds and investments and any investments substituted therefor are herein collectively referred to as \"my residuary estate\") upon the following trusts, viz:\".\n\nThe Testator died on the 27th March 1926 domiciled in the Colony. Estate Duty was paid on the whole of the Testator's estate and Probate was granted by the Supreme Court of the Colony on the 9th September 1926.\n\nNo fund was set aside by the Trustees to meet the said annuity to the Testator's wife but the same was paid out of the general income of the residuary estate as and when it",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550741,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 27,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "26\n\nFROM\n\nBURCHELLS,\n\nLETTER TO The Controller, Estate Duty Office.\n\nSHEET NO.\n\nDATE 10.7.36.\n\nbecame due.\n\nThe widow died on the 11th March 1935 and the Trustees were assessed to and paid Estate Duty on the cesser of the said annuity on an agreed figure of £125,000.\n\nThe Trustees appealed against the decision of the Estate Duty Commissioner that the duty was payable, on the ground that the dispositions of the Testator's Will by which the annuity was given to his wife for life, ceasing on her death, gave the wife an interest in the residuary estate which on her death did not disappear but was transferred by law to the ultimate beneficiaries and that such disposition amounted to a settlement within the terms of s.25 (see below) of the Estate Duty Ordinance of the Colony and that, therefore, under the terms of Section 25(1) no estate duty would be payable on the death of the wife in respect of that part of the residuary estate which represents the notional fund which would have sufficed to meet the annuity.\n\nThey did not suggest that the whole of the residuary estate was settled, but they contended that there was a settlement of a \"slice\" of the residue, the \"notional fund\" which would have sufficed to meet the annuity.\n\nThe discretionary power to set apart and appropriate was not actually exercised.\n\nSection 25 of the Estate Duty Ordinance reads as follows and, in fact, states the English law on the subject",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550753,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 39,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "38\n\nthe respondent's legal advisers have called attention to the following passage which appears on page 262 of the 7th Edition of Dymond on Death Duties:-\n\n\"The expression \"settled property\" is given a liberal construction.\n\nThe exemption is applied, for instance, to cases where the surviving spouse had an annuity simpliciter under the will of the other spouse.\n\nThough the author does not cite any authority in support of this passage, it is felt that this statement by one who is a recognized authority on death duties should not be ignored as it may indicate a practice (as distinguished from a recognition of legal entitlement) adopted by the authorities in England.\n\nI should be grateful if enquiry might be made of the Inland Revenue Authorities as to whether such a practice is recognized.\n\nIf such a practice be recognized, then it would seem desirable that the Estate Duty Ordinance of this Colony should be operated in conformity with that practice and that the legal representatives of the respondent in London should arrange terms of settlement with the appellant's representatives. The fact that the Government of this Colony was a beneficiary under the testator's will seems a further reason for conformity with any practice which may operate to relieve the estate of duties.\n\nEnclo.No.1.\n\nEnclo.No.2. Enclo.No.3.\n\n6.\n\nI enclose the following :-\n\nThree copies of the record.\n\n1932.\n\nOne copy of the Estate Duty Ordinance,\n\nTwo copies of the Crown Solicitor's observations on the case.\n\nI have the honour to be,\n\nSir,\n\nYour most obedient, humble servant,\n\nA Caldecott\n\nGovernor, &c.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550765,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 51,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "53\n\nNo. 10. Judgment of the\n\nChief\n\nJustice\n\non the\n\nPetition.\n\n27th June, 1935.\n\n12\n\nNo. 10. Judgment of the Chief Justice on the Petition.\n\nThis is an appeal by the trustees of the Will of Sir Catchick Paul Chater deceased against a decision of the Estate Duty Commissioner.\n\nThe material provisions of the will of the deceased are as follows:-\n\n(5) I bequeath the following annuities all clear of death duties and income tax payable to the respective parties hereinafter enumerated commencing from my death by equal quarterly payments the first payment in each case to be made at the expiration of three months from my death. (a) to my wife during her life the annual sum of ten thousand pounds sterling.\n\n(8) Subject to the payment of my funeral and testamentary expenses and debts and any legacies bequeathed by this my will or by any codicil hereto and the duty (if any) upon legacies and annuities bequeathed free of duty and subject to making provision for the payment of any annuities bequeathed by this my will or by any codicil hereto my trustees shall invest.\n\n10\n\n(13) I declare that my trustees shall be at liberty if they so think fit to appropriate and set apart out of my residuary estate investments representing such a capital fund as shall at the time of appropriation be sufficient to produce annual sums directed to be paid by clause five of this my will with such a liberal margin for contingencies as in the opinion of my trustees shall be sufficient.\n\nEstate duty was paid on the whole of the estate of the deceased when probate was granted in 1926.\n\nNo fund was set aside by the trustees to meet the annuity to the widow of the deceased, which was paid out of the general income of the estate as and when each payment became due.\n\nThe annuitant, Lady Maria Christine Chater, died on 11th March, 1935, in these circumstances the trustees contend that no estate duty is payable by reason of the cesser of the annuity, and they base their contention on the provisions of section 25 of the Estate Duty Ordinance, 1932, which reads as follows:-\n\n25. (1) If estate duty has already been paid in respect of any settled property since the date of the settlement, upon the death of one of the parties to a marriage, no estate duty shall be payable on the death of the other party to the marriage unless such person was at the time of his or her death or had been at any time during the continuance of the settlement competent to dispose of such property.\n\n(2) For the purposes of this section, the term settlement means any deed, will, agreement for a settlement, or other instrument, or any number of instruments, whether made before or after or partly before and partly after the commencement of this Ordinance, under or by virtue of which instrument or instruments any property, or any estate or any interest in any property, stands for the time being limited to or in trust for any persons by way of succession, and the term settled property means the property comprised in a settlement.\n\n13\n\nThe short point which I have to decide is whether on the facts of this case there is or is not a settlement as defined in sub-section (2) of that section. (Continued)\n\nMr. Macnamara for the appellants relies on the decisions in A. G. V. Owen (1899) 2 Q.B. p. 253 re: Campbell (1902) 1 K.B. p. 113, re: Waller (1916) 1 Ch. p. 153 and A. G. v. Watson (1917) 2 K.B. p. 427.\n\nIn these cases the facts in the first three are clearly distinguishable from those with which we are here concerned. In each of these cases the testator had by express direction instructed his trustees to set aside out of the residuary estate a fund sufficient to meet the payment of the annuities. In each of these cases it was held that the fund so set aside was property settled by the testator's will, or to put it in another way, that by the will property, or an estate or interest in property, stood for the time being limited to or in trust for a person or persons by way of succession. It was with these facts, and these facts alone, that the Court in each of these cases was concerned, but an examination of the judgments shows how careful the learned judges were to make it clear that their reasoning did not extend to the case of the simple gift of an annuity.\n\nThus in re: Campbell, Asquith K.C., and Pollard for the appellants, arguendo, state :\n\n'The case contemplated by the Settled Land Act 1882, s.2, is the ordinary case of settlements in which a life estate or some such limited estate is followed by interests in remainder. A gift of an annuity is not a gift of such a life estate. An annuity is only a pecuniary legacy payable by instalments\" and Sir R. B. Finlay A. G. and Vaughan Hawkins for the Crown argue thus \"It is not necessary for the purposes of this case to consider how the matter would stand if there were merely the gift of an annuity by will in general terms, and no provision for appropriation of any special fund to provide for it. Possibly such an annuity might be regarded merely on the footing of a pecuniary legacy payable by instalments\". Stirling L. J. ends his judgment in these words \"I only wish to add that it was admitted in argument that this decision does not conclude the case of a simple gift of an annuity in general terms where there is no such trust for payment of the annuity out of a particular fund as in the present case, I desire in giving judgment in this case to leave that case entirely untouched.\"\n\nThe gift of the annuity In re: Waller, Sargant L. J. goes further simpliciter would not, in my opinion, at any rate I am not aware of any decision to that effect, have rendered any part of the testator's estate a settled fund or have subjected the annuity to the payment of settlement estate duty--that is to say the principal gift of the annuity would not have rendered it liable to settlement estate duty at all.\n\nPage 13\n\nJudgment\n\nof the\n\nChief\n\nJustice\n\non the Petition.\n\n27th June,\n\n1935.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550766,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 52,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "54\n\n14\n\nM\n\nNo. 10.\n\nJudgment of the Chief Justice on the Petition.\n\nThe case of A. G. v. Watson decided no more than this: that an annuitant whose annuity was to be paid out of the residuary estate, as in the present case, without any provision for setting aside a fund to meet the annuity payments had an interest in the testator's residuary estate within the meaning of the relevant sections of the Finance Act 1894, and that upon the annuitant's death estate duty became payable in respect of the benefit which accrued to the residuary estate upon the death of the annuitant by the cesser of the annuity. Were that principle not accepted the appellants in this case would not have been driven to rely on the provisions of section 25 of the Ordinance, but I can find nothing in the report of that case which in any way supports Mr. Macnamara's contention regarding the correct interpretation of that section.\n\n27th June, 1935.\n\nMr. Potter has drawn my attention to the cases of Re: Earl of Carnarvon's Estates (1927) 1 Ch. p. 138 and Re: Lord Alington and the London County Council's Contract (1927) 2 Ch. p. 253. With these authorities I do not propose to deal at length: I shall confine myself to one passage from the judgment of Russell J. in Lord Alington's case:\n\nIn re Campbell was not cited to Romer J. but when that case is looked at all that is decided was that where a fund was set aside out of a mixed residue to provide by the income thereof certain annuities, upon the cesser of which the persons entitled to residue would be entitled to the fund, settlement estate duty was payable on so much of the residue as had been set aside. It was held that the fund was limited in trust for persons by way of succession. That decision does not justify the proposition that the existence of a jointure charged on an estate vested in an owner in fee made, under the old law, the estate a settled estate. If it did the whole of the residuary estate would have been subject to settlement estate duty. I must further point out that Stirling L.J. carefully confines the decision to the case of a fund being set aside to provide an annuity, and keeps open the case of a simple gift of an annuity where there is no trust for its payment out of a particular fund.\n\nIt is possibly the fear that a successful argument might render the whole of the residuary estate subject to settlement estate duty that has restrained persons in the position of the appellants from advancing in the High Court of Judicature such an argument as I have listened to in this case.\n\n30\n\nIn my opinion the appeal fails so far as this ground of appeal is concerned. The appellants in their statement of grounds of appeal further contend: (8) The trustees further contended (in paragraph 10 of the said Account) that if estate duty were payable by reason of the circumstances which had happened such estate duty should be calculated in accordance with the Third Schedule of Ordinance No. 3 of 1932 but that having regard to the fact that section 13 (5) of Ordinance No. 16 of 1915 and the explanatory clause of the Third Schedule of Ordinance No. 16 of 1915 had not been incorporated in Ordinance No. 3 of 1932 such duty was impossible to calculate and was therefore not payable.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550771,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 57,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "Page 60\n\nNo. 14. Notes of the \n\nChief Justice on the \n\nAppeal \n\nto the \n\nFull Court. \n\n8th January 1936. \n\n(Continued) \n\nClause 8 \n\n20 \n\nL \n\nresidual gift \n\n+6 \n\n'subject to making provision for payment of \n\nannuities' \n\nimplies instructions to set aside funds. \n\nClause 8 is thus operative \n\nand Clause 13 merely mechanical \n\nClause 14 shows intention to make settlements. \n\nBy self: What of words \"if they so think fit\" at beginning of 13? Macnamara: They have same effect as postponement of conversion etc. Carmichael & Gee. 1880 A.C. 588. \n\np. 593-4 \n\nclauses of administration and management. \n\n595-postponement of conversion won't be allowed to defeat any rights. Annuitant can resort to any part of estate. \n\nSettlement\" or 'no settlement\" depends on terms of Will. \n\nAs to judgment of Court below. \n\nProperty can equally well be described by reference to income as by reference to capital. \n\nHere testator could equally well have directed setting aside of income from £ X of property in which case settlement would be complete. \n\nAnnuity interest on so much property. \n\nProperty, estate and interest not to be lumped together. \n\nHere 'interest\" alone is involved. \n\nGift of annuity is gift of life interest. \n\nRe Campbell and Re Waller preceded Watson's case. \n\nWatson's case established that annuity included interest in residue. \n\nIn Carnarvon's and Alington's cases \n\nPoint was whether whole estates were \"settled\" under Settled Land Act. \n\nNever suggested here the whole estate became \"settled\". \n\nRe Trafford's Estates (1915) 1 Ch. 9 \n\nThrows some doubt on correctness of Carnarvon's and Alington's cases. \n\nIf judgment correct. \n\nAppropriation is vital and necessary part of settlement. Appropriation plus Will necessary. \n\nbut s. 25 (2) requires no more than Will or other instrument. Appropriation could be effected by book-entry or letter to bank. \n\n10 \n\n4 \n\n10 \n\n20 \n\n20 \n\n30 \n\n30 \n\n21 \n\n \n\n61 \n\nClauses 8 and 13 together effect settlement. \n\nHow can settlement be dependent on act of trustees. \n\nAdjourned to 10 a.m. tomorrow. \n\nIn Court-10 a.m. Appeal 14/35-resumed. \n\nCounsel as before. \n\nNo. 14. \n\nNotes of the Chief Justice \n\non the \n\nAppeal to the Full Court. 8th January 1936. \n\n(Continued) \n\nPotter, K.C. \n\n? Did Lady C.'s annuity create settlement. \n\nWe say mere grant without setting aside does not create settlement. \n\nI (4) Will-Clause 5-grants annuity simpliciter \n\nClause 8-object one and only is to provide for distribution \n\nof residuary estate. \n\n\"Subject to making provision for annuities\" is recognition that this must be done before residuary legatees can be paid- \n\nNo direction whatever to appropriate. \n\nClause 13-Does not merely postpone appropriation-it gives trustees complete liberty to do what they think fit- \n\nappropriation entirely discretionary. No mention of postponement. \n\nNo duty in trustees to appropriate No reason here why they should Sterling annuities = £14,500 p.a. needing high sum to cover. \n\n(B) Granting simpliciter can't create settlement \n\nHanson's Death Duties \n\n105-especial reference to Watson's case \n\nHlarman's Finance Act. 79.— \n\nTest of life interest passing at death. \n\nIn case of life interest, tenant has estate-is c. q. t. of fund which \n\npasses on death to remaindermen. \n\nAnnuitant simple has no estate, but mere charge on property. \n\nSo in A.G. v. Watson held merely that annuitant has interest in \n\nproperty which brought case within provisions of s. 2(1) of Act. Had annuities simple been previously deemed settlements what need for \n\nnew legislation?\n\nPage 61",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550774,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 60,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "64\n\n65\n\nNo. 15. Notes of the Puisne Judge on the appeal to the Full Court. 8th January, 1936. (Continued)\n\n24 Does not matter whether the funds were set aside or not. Court will act on the maxim that equity regards as done that which ought to have been done.\n\nThe word \"interest\" is used in ss. 5 and 25. Annuitant had an \"interest\" in the residuary property.\n\n13 Halsbury p. 229 s. 304.\n\nA G. v. Watson (1917) 2 K. B. 427—Held that the annuitant had an \"interest\" in the testator's residuary estate.\n\nA. G. v. Owen (1899) 2 Q. B. 253 at p. 256 and at 261, 263 from \"We may be obliged.....to the residuary legatee\", also at 265 and 266.\n\n10 Re Campbell (1902) 1 K. B. 113 at 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122. Particular fund means a determinable fund.\n\nRe Waller (1916) 1 Ch. at 158.\n\nA. G. v. Robinson (1893) 1 Q. B. 293, re meaning of succession—see p. 298 also 301.\n\nPasses to equitable maxim above referred to in 13 Halsbury p. 73 s. 82 Harbin v. Masterman (1896) I Ch. 351 at 360.\n\nAdjourned to 2.30 p.m.\n\n2.30 p.m. Same counsel and solicitors.\n\nMacnamara continues,\n\nCan read into the Will a direction that a fund shall be set aside—refers to Clause 8 \"subject to making provision for the payment of any annuities' etc. Also to Clause 13 which is merely administrative.\n\nCarmichael v. Gee (1879-80) 5 Appeal Cases 588 headnote and at 593 (end of), at 545.\n\nWill Clause 14 points to settled property.\n\n10 9.1.36\n\n10 a.m.\n\n20 20\n\nRefers to judgment in this case of Sir Atholl MacGregor C. J.—last para. of p. 47. An annuity is the interest on so much property—it does not matter whether you designate it by its capital or by its income.\n\nP. 48—in the case of the present Will there is a provision for appropriation.\n\nIn re Waller (supra) the passage from the judgment of Sargant J. is only a dictum.\n\nAlso p. 49. We only contend that a part sufficient to pay the annuities.\n\nI am not going to argue the 2nd ground of appeal.\n\nIn land cases it is a settlement of all the land or nothing but this is not the case in the case of money.\n\nIn re Trafford's Settled Estates (1915) ↑ Ch. 9.\n\n30 25\n\nNo. 15. the Puisne Judge on the Appeal to the Full Court. 8th January, 1936. (Continued)\n\nIn re Carnarvon (1927) 1 Ch. 138, Lord Alington (1927) 2 Ch. 253 and In re Trafford's Estate are in fact not relevant to this case.\n\nFrom Notes of the C. J.'s judgment in order that the Will should be a settlement there would have to be appropriation and that must be wrong, as Will must be either a settlement or not.\n\nThe Will amounts to a settlement of sufficient money to pay an annuity of £10,000 per annum.\n\nAdjourned to 10 a.m. on 9.1.36.\n\nSame counsel and solicitors.\n\nPotter, K.C.:-\n\nFirst point does the bequest of an annuity to Lady Chater constitute a settlement.\n\nWill Clause 5 grants an annuity simpliciter.\n\nWill Clause 8 sole object is to provide for the distribution of the residuary estate.\n\nBefore the residuary legatees can get anything provision must be made for payment of legacies etc\n\nNo direction to appropriate property for payment of annuities.\n\nWill Clause 13 gives trustees complete liberty to appropriate or not a fund for the payment of annuities as they think fit.\n\nHanson on Death Duties 8th Ed. 105.\n\nHarman Finance Act, 1894, 4th Ed. p. 79 \"An annuity charged on corpus with power to set aside a fund to answer the annuity, is not, it is submitted, settled property\".\n\nAn annuity granted simpliciter gives no charge on a specific fund.\n\nA.G. v. Watson (1917) 2. K.B. 427 merely directed that if there is a simple annuity the case is brought within the scope of the Act for the purpose of payment of duty as the annuitant has an \"interest\" but it does not decide that that \"interest\" is settled property.\n\nRefers to passage in judgment of Lush J. at end of p. 430.\n\nRefers to passage in judgment of Lush J. p. 431— and I think .........look for the payment of her annuity\".\n\nA.G. v. Owen (1899) 2 Q.B. 253, at p. 263, at 265, also at 265.\n\nWhat property or what fund has ever been enjoyed by Lady Chater?\n\nRe Campbell (1902) 1 K.B. 113 at 119, at 120, at 122.\n\nIt is the fund which is directed to be set aside to secure the annuity which is settled—no direction in this case.\n\nRe Waller (1916) i Ch. 153 at 154, at 156, at 158.\n\nThe passage referred to in the judgment of Sargant J. by Mr. Macnamara is not dictum\n\nPage 60\n\nPage 61\n\n66",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550776,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 62,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "Sir,\n\nNo. 16.\n\nLetter from Appellants Solicitor to The Registrar of the Supreme Court Hongkong.\n\nHongkong, 6th February, 1936.\n\nre SIR C. P. CHATER, DECEASED.\n\nESTATE DUTY APPEAL.\n\nMISC. PROC. No. 31 OF 1935.\n\nSince the hearing of this Appeal the Trustees of the Chater estate have found another case which they contend supports their argument and to which they desire to draw the attention of the Court.\n\nThey have approached the legal advisers for the Estate Duty Commissioner, namely, the Crown Solicitor and Mr. Eldon Potter, K.C., who have agreed that this letter, which has been approved by them in draft, shall be placed before the members of the Full Court, subject of course to their Lordships' approval.\n\nThe case in question is re Booth, (1916) 1 Ch. 349, 114 Law Times Reports, 498 and the contentions of the Trustees thereon are as follows:-\n\nIt appears that in that case the Testator by his Will and a Codicil thereto gave his estate to his Executors upon trust to pay an annuity of £150. It was admitted throughout the proceedings in that case by all parties, both the Plaintiff and the Defendant and by the Judge that the notional or actual fund which would produce this annuity was liable to payment of settlement estate duty; this of course would be correct only if the disposition effected by the testator amounted to a settlement. The Trustees maintain that it makes no difference whether the trust for the residuary fund is imposed by the actual words of the Will or by implication of law as they have argued in the present case.\n\nOn the other hand the legal advisers of the Estate Duty Commissioner contend as follows:-\n\nThis case is clearly one of a Settlement.\n\nThe effect of the testator's Will and Codicil (which must be read as one) was that the whole of the residuary estate was given to the executors upon trust for Elizabeth Booth for life, with a gift over after the death of E.B. to four persons and that there was grafted onto this disposition, which effected a settlement of the whole of the residuary estate, the requirements (a) by the codicil, that an annuity of £150 should be paid to Charlotte Pleace for life (commencing from the testator's death) and (b) by the will, that an annuity of £150 should be paid to Charlotte Pleace for life, if she should survive Elizabeth Booth.\n\nIn neither case could the annuity be dissociated from the settlement of the entire residuary estate, nor could either of the \"notional or actual funds\" which would produce the annuity be at any time regarded as taken out of the settlement\n\nNo. 16. Letter from the Appellants Solicitor to the Registrar of the Supreme Court Hongkong. 6th February 1936.\n\n67",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550777,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 63,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "69\n\nthe\n\nNo. 16.\n\n28\n\nof the whole of the residue. In the case of the conditional annuity (i.e., that Letter from conditioned on survivorship) the \"notional or actual fund\" necessarily remained Appellants subject to the settlement because the tenant for life, Elizabeth Booth, was entitled to the income thereof during her life as income of a part of the settled residue; while in the case of the annuity to commence immediately on the testator's death the \"notional or actual fund\" remained subject to the trusts of the settlement because the tenant for life was at once entitled to the income thereof (as income Hongkong of a part of the entire settled residue) if the annuitant should predecease her.\n\nSolicitor to the Registrar of the Supreme Court\n\n6th Febru-ary, 1936.\n\n(Continued)\n\nThe Court did not draw any distinction, for the purposes of Settlement Estate Duty, between the natures of the \"notional or actual funds\" for the 10 immediate and the conditional annuities as parts of the entire settled residuary estate, and gave no indication whatsoever that it was otherwise than as parts of such entire settled residuary estate that either of the \"notional or actual funds would attract Settlement Estate Duty.\n\nThe position was that there was no specific property set aside by the direction of the testator for the purpose of meeting the annuities (whereby a settlement would per se have been created of such property), but the trustees were empowered out of property already subjected to a settlement to set aside a slice to meet the annuities and such slice had accordingly to bear its due propor-tion of the duty.\n\nIn the following words which appear in the judgment (p. 356) there appears to be a clear recognition of the fact that Settlement Estate Duty had been paid on the \"notional or actual fund\" not as a fund set aside to meet the annuity given by the will or codicil but as a fund forming a part of an entire settled residuary estate :-\n\n+\n\n20\n\n\"He asserts that no settlement estate duty has ever in fact been paid in respect of the plaintiff's reversionary annuity. I agree that it was not so paid \"in name; but the plaintiff's reversionary annuity was at the testator's death \"part of the residue, and settlement estate duty was, in my opinion, as truly\n\npaid in respect of it under that description as was settlement estate duty paid 30 \"on the plaintiff's immediate annuity under the same description\".\n\nWe shall be much obliged therefore if you will be good enough to transmit this letter, of which we enclose three copies for your use, to their Lordships the Members of the Full Court in order that, subject to their approval, they may give this case consideration and include it in the record.\n\nThe Registrar,\n\nSupreme Court.\n\nWe have the honour to be, Sir.\n\nYour obedient servants,\n\nSd/ DEACONS,\n\n40\n\n29\n\nNo. 17. Judgment of the Chief Justice on the Appeal to the Full Court.\n\nNo. 17. Judgment of the Chief\n\nto the Full\n\nCourt.\n\nThis is an appeal against the judgment of Sir Atholl MacGregor, C.J. Justice on dismissing an appeal by the present appellants, the Trustees of the Will of Sir Catchick Paul Chater, deceased, against a decision of the Estate Duty Commis-sioner, the present Respondent, requiring payment of estate duty on the cesser 17th Febru of an annuity bequeathed by the Will to the deceased's wife Lady Chater, now also deceased.\n\nAs in the Court below the only question involved is a short, though not a simple one, namely whether or no the gift of the said annuity was a settle-ment of property, or of an interest or estate in property, limited by way of succession\" so as to enable the appellants to take advantage of the provisions of section 25 of the Estate Duty Ordinance, 1932. Counsel for the appellants has made two submissions in support of his contention that such a settlement was effected; firstly that in the Will itself can be found such a direction to appro-priate part of the estate to answer the annuity as constituted a settlement, and that therefore, although no appropriation was in fact made by the trustees, equity will regard that as done which ought to have been; and secondly, that the gift of an annuity simpliciter charged upon the residue of the estate was just as much a settlement as if the annuity had been charged upon a definite 20 portion of the estate.\n\nAs regards the first of these submissions, the material provisions of the Will are as follows:-\n\n(5) \"I bequeath the following annuities etc., etc.,\n\n(a) To my wife during her life the sum of ten thousand pounds\n\nsterling.\n\n(8) Subject to the payment of my funeral and testamentary expenses etc., and subject to making provision for any annuities bequeathed by this my Will or by any Codicil thereto my Trustees shall invest etc.\n\n(13) I declare that my Trustees shall be at liberty if they so think fit to 30 appropriate and set apart out of my residuary estate investments representing such a capital fund as shall at the time of appropriation be sufficient to produce the annual sums directed to be paid by Clause Five of this my Will with such a liberal margin for contingencies as in the opinion of my Trustees shall be sufficient And I declare that when such appropriation has been made the said annual sums shall be wholly charged on the investments so appropriated in exoneration of the rest of my estate but that the capital of such appropriated investments may be resorted to in case at any time the income thereof is insufficient to pay any such annual sum or sums And I further declare that on the cesser of any of such annual sums such part of the appropriated investments 40 as shall not in the opinion of my Trustees be required for the payment of the other annual sum or sums for the time being payable under the trusts of this my Will shall revert to and form part of my residuary estate and that any surplus\n\nary 1936.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550778,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 64,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "70\n\n30.\n\nNo. 17. Judgment of the Chief Justice on the Appeal\n\nto the Full Court.\n\nincome arising from the appropriated investments shall be applied as income of my residuary estate.\"\n\nThe trustees never made the appropriation allowed by Clause (13). Had they done so it may be that a settlement as defined by s. 25 (2) of the Estate Duty Ordinance, 1932, would have been effected and no estate duty would have\n\nbeen leviable on the cesser of Lady Chater's annuity.\n\n17th February, 1936.\n\n(Continued)\n\nMr. Macnamara however contends that the words in Clause (8) of the Will \"subject to making provision for any annuities bequeathed by this my Will\" are per se operative to require the Trustees to make an appropriation to answer Lady Chater's and the other annuities, and that the provisions of Clause 10 (13) are mere machinery allowing postponement of appropriation in the discretion of the trustees.\n\nHe then proceeds to argue that despite the failure of the trustees to appropriate and set aside any part of the estate, equity will come to their rescue and that of the residuary legatees by deeming that to have been done which ought to have been done. He also relies on Harbin v. Masterman, (1896) 1 Ch. 351, as showing that a residuary legatee has the right to have part of the deceased's estate appropriated and set aside to answer an annuity given by the Will.\n\nIn support of his second submission, Mr. Macnamara contends that, even if no appropriation was made or deemed in equity to have been made, yet the bequest of Lady Chater's annuity was a settlement as defined by s. 25 (2) of the Estate Duty Ordinance in that it gave her an \"interest in property which stood for the time being limited to her by way of succession.\" He does not contend that her interest extended to the whole of the residuary estate but merely to an undivided share thereof large enough to answer her annuity and therefore sufficiently ascertainable to become settled property.\n\nHe has drawn our attention to a number of authorities, all of which he cited in the Court below, and in particular to A. G. v. Watson, (1917) 2 K. B. 42, and argues that although those cases do not specifically establish that the gift of an annuity simpliciter is a settlement, yet they leave the point open, the remarks thereon of Sargant J. in In re Waller (1916) 1 Ch. 153 at p. 158 being merely obiter; and that the judgment of Lush J. in A. G. v. Watson decides that an annuity is not at any rate a legacy payable by instalments but an interest in the estate which passes on the annuitant's death to others, i.e. such an interest as is within the meaning of s. 25 (2) as of s. 5 (2) of the Ordinance.\n\nWith the first of these submissions I am not in agreement.\n\nI can find no direction whatever in the words \"subject to making provision for any annuities bequeathed by this my will\" in Clause (8) of the Will requiring the trustees to set aside any part of the residuary estate to answer the annuities. The whole object of this clause is to provide for the distribution of the testator's residuary estate, and the words quoted are no more",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550779,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 65,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "31\n\nthe Chief\n\nto the Full\n\nary, 1936.\n\nthan a recognition that this cannot be effected by the trustees without their first No. 17. estimating what proportion of the estate will be sufficient to answer the annuities. Furthermore I find it impossible to read into Clause 13 of the Will anything resembling a declaration of the trustees' right to postpone appropriation. The words \"my Trustees shall be at liberty, if they so think fit, to appropriate, etc.\" give the trustees absolute discretion to appropriate or not to appropriate, and the fact that they have exercised that discretion in a way that may now cause loss to the residuary estate cannot entitle them to call equity to their aid and ask this Court to say that what might have been done to the advantage of the estate should be deemed to have been done. Nor again does the case of Harbin v. Masterman (supra) help the appellants since that case decided no more than that in proper circumstances the Court will allow a remainderman's claim for the distribution of the residuary estate by requiring the trustees to set aside a sufficient portion of the estate to answer annuities given by the Will. It does not decide that any residuary legatee has the absolute right to come in at any time and claim such setting aside and distribution, and even if it did, I fail to see how it could help the appellants who are the trustees of the Will, and not the residuary legatees.\n\nNor am I in agreement with the second submission made for the appellants. 20 I agree with the judgment on this point of Sir Atholl MacGregor, C.J. in the Court below. Apart from the case of A. G. v. Watson (supra) the other judgments relied on, A. G. v. Owen (1899) 2 Q. B. 253; In re Campbell, (1902) 1 K.B. 113; In re Waller (1916) 1 Ch. 153; established no more than that where a testator's will directs the setting aside out of his estate of a fund to answer annuities, such a fund becomes settled property, and were most carefully worded to make clear that this principle should not necessarily be interpreted \"to conclude the case of a simple gift of an annuity in general terms where there is no trust for payment of the annuity out of a particular fund\" (per Stirling L.J. in re Campbell (supra)). It is true that the decision in A. G. v. Watson (supra) goes 30 a step further in holding that the gift of an annuity simpliciter does give the annuitant an interest in the testator's residuary estate, but this decision and that in the later case of A. G. v. Cook (1921) 3 K. B. 607, where an annual payment was charged on four fifths of the residuary estate, go no further than to say that the interest of the annuitant in such a case is such an interest as, though it does not actually pass to any other person on the annuitant's death, yet is deemed so to pass in accordance with the provisions of sec. 2 (1) of the Finance Act, 1894 (57 and 58 Vict. c. 30). That sub-section is the source of s.s.2 of s.5 of the Estate Duty Ordinance, 1932, and it seems clear therefore that Lady Chater had an interest, ceasing on the death, in her husband's 40 residuary estate which must be deemed to have passed on her death and to have therefore attracted estate duty to the extent to which a benefit accrued or arose by virtue of the cesser of such interest. Were that not so, the appellants need not have called the provisions of s.25 of the Ordinance to their aid.\n\nI do not, however, think there is substance in Mr. Macnamara's argument that because the Will gave Lady Chater this interest in her husband's residuary estate it follows that her interest was itself in the nature of settled property.\n\n71",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550780,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 66,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "72\n\n32\n\n―\n\n33\n\n―\n\n73\n\nNo. 17. Judgment of the Chief Justice on the Appeal to the Full Court.\n\n17th February, 1936.\n\n(Continued)\n\nSection 25 of the Estate Duty Ordinance, 1932, reads as follows:-\n\n(1) If estate duty has already been paid in respect of settled property any since the date of the settlement, upon the death of one of the parties to a marriage, no estate duty shall be payable on the death of the other party to the marriage unless such person was at the time of his or her death or had been at any time during the continuance of the settlement competent to dispose of such property.\n\n(2) For the purposes of this section, the term settlement means any deed, will, agreement for a settlement or other instrument, or any number of instruments, whether made before or after or partly before and partly after the commencement of this Ordinance, under or by virtue of which instrument or instruments any property, or any estate or interest in any property, stands for the time being limited to or in trust for any persons by way of succession, and the term settled property means the property comprised in a settlement.\n\nIn my view s.s. (2) must be read to mean that a Will or other instrument is a settlement only if it directs the appropriation of certain specific property, or an estate or interest in certain specific property, to, or in trust for, any person for life. Here the Will directed no such appropriation.\n\nThis view is supported by statements in Hanson's Death Duties (8th Edition) at p. 105 \"an annuity simpliciter would not apparently be settled property.\" In Harman's Finance Act (4th Edition) at p. 79 an annuity charged on corpus with power to set aside a fund to answer the annuity is not, it is submitted, settled property. The test seems to be whether the annuity is equivalent to a life interest, i.e. is to be paid only out of the income from a fund directed to be set aside for the purpose which goes over on the cesser of the annuity\"; and also by the cases cited by Mr. Potter for the Respondent, In re Earl of Carnarvon's Settled Estates, (1927) 1 Ch. 139, and re Lord Alington and the London County Councils Contract, (1927) 2 Ch. 253, which decided that the existence of a rent charge or jointure, charged on an estate in an owner in fee, had not made the estate a settled estate.\n\nSince the above judgment was written my attention has been drawn by the legal advisers of the appellants, with the consent of those of the respondent, to a further case—Re Booth, Place v. Booth (1916) 1 Ch. 349. In that case the testator had by his will settled his residuary estate upon his executors for A for life and then for other persons subject to the payment to B out of the income of an annuity commencing on A's death, and had by a codicil given also an immediate annuity to B payable out of the same income. It was agreed that B had to bear her proportionate share of the settlement estate duty paid in respect of the whole settled residue on the testator's death, and it was further held by the Court that she must also bear her proportionate share of the estate duty payable on the death of A, she being regarded as enjoying the income from an actual or notional part of the settled estate. In my view, however, this decision does not help the appellants since the reason for B's liability to pay a proportionate share of the duty was not that her interest in the estate was in itself settled property or that her notional or actual slice of the estate was property settled upon herself, but that her slice being itself part and parcel of the settled residue has accordingly to bear its share of the duty.\n\nFor these reasons I am of opinion that this appeal fails and must be dismissed with costs.\n\nSd/ R. E. LINDSELL,\n\nChief Justice,\n\n17.2.36.\n\n10\n\nNo. 18. Judgment of Puisne Judge on the appeal to the Full Court.\n\nI concur. I have had the privilege of reading the Judgment of the President of the Court which has just been delivered and as I am in agreement with the views therein expressed including his views as to the reason for the decision in Re Booth (1916) 1 Ch. 349, to which our attention was drawn after the hearing of this Appeal, I shall not deal in detail with the cases referred to by Appellants' Counsel but confine myself to a consideration of the two grounds on which Mr. Macnamara submits this appeal should be allowed.\n\nAs regards the first ground I consider before the equitable maxim can be applied in the present case the will of the testator must contain a clear and imperative direction to set apart a fund to pay the annuity in question. This would appear to be the view taken by the learned Judges of the Court of Appeal in Re Twopenny's Settlement (1924) 1 Ch. 522 as Pollock M.R. in his Judgment said at p. 529;\n\nThe words quoted above— imperatively and definitely must be found appropriate to describe the effect of the instrument\".\n\nWarrington L.J. stated at pp. 532–533;\n\nThe doctrine that in equity land may be converted into money and money into land at the will of a settlor depends upon the principle that a Court of equity will not permit the default of a trustee to perform a duty imposed upon him to affect the nature of the interests conferred upon the beneficiaries, and therefore treats as actually done that which ought to have been done. Accordingly, if money is directed to be invested in the purchase of land to be settled upon certain uses that money, though not actually so invested, will devolve according to the provisions of the settlement exactly as the land would have devolved had it been purchased therewith.\n\nIt is obvious that, having regard to the principle upon which the doctrine of conversion is founded, there must be a paramount obligation binding the trustees to invest in the purchase of land, and therefore if...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550781,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 67,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "74\n\nNo. 18.\n\nJudgment of the Puisne Judge on the Appeal to the Full Court.\n\n34\n\nsuch investment is optional only, so that the trustees may completely perform their duty by investing in some form of personal security, there would be no conversion, and the rights of the parties would depend on the actual nature of the property at the material time\".\n\n17th February, 1936. (Continued)\n\n\"But in order that an equitable conversion of money into land may be effected, it is necessary that the trust for conversion should be definite and imperative. It will not do, for instance, if the trust is permissive only, or if there is an alternative to invest either in real estate or in leaseholds\". The Will in this case does not, to my mind, disclose any paramount obligation upon the trustees to set apart out of the residue a fund sufficient to pay the annuity of £10,000 to Lady Chater as Clause 13 clearly gives the trustees a discretion to do so or not \"if they so think fit.\" Accordingly I am of opinion that equity cannot be invoked in support of this appeal.\n\nNow coming to the second submission of Appellants' Counsel, I consider the annuity to Lady Chater as the gift of an annuity simpliciter, there being, as stated, no direction in the Will to set aside a fund out of which it was to be paid. The cases referred to by Mr. Macnamara do not support the view that the gift of an annuity simpliciter would constitute any portion of testator's estate as settled, indeed in one of them (Re Waller (1916) 1 Ch. 153) Sargant J. at p. 158 expresses an opinion to the contrary. This, it is true, is merely obiter as the question did not arise directly for decision. Mr. Macnamara's submission is that the annuity in question was an interest in property which interest stood limited to or in trust for Lady Chater for life and passed on her death to the residuary legatees the Armenian Holy Church of Nazareth. Lady Chater's interest was not an interest in any specific part of the residue, she had merely an interest in the entire residue (admittedly unsettled) which interest was limited to ensuring the payment of her annuity of £10,000. I fail to see how such an interest can be regarded as a settled interest in property. The cases to which we have been referred do not support this view and both Hanson and Harman, to which Mr. Potter has referred, are against it.\n\nMr. Macnamara's contention is that the gift of the annuity was the gift of a life interest. A life interest in what? His answer is that it was a life interest in an undivided share of the residuary estate easily ascertainable by an arithmetical calculation. But the amount of capital necessary to secure the payment of £10,000 a year would vary from time to time depending upon the productivity of the investments at any given period. I do not consider that an interest in such a fluctuating capital can be regarded as a settled interest in property limited to persons by way of succession within the meaning of s. 25 (2) of the Estate Duty Ordinance, 1932, and therefore agree that this appeal should be dismissed with costs.\n\nSd/ J. J. HAYDEN, PUISNE JUDGE, February 1936.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550794,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 80,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "## Probate of The Will and Codicils of Sir Catchick Paul Chater, deceased. (Continued)\n\n24. I DIRECT that my Solicitor Messrs. Deacons be employed by my Executors and Trustees to act for them in the administration of my estate and be paid all usual professional charges for any business done by him or his firm in the ordinary course of his profession in relation to my estate or the trusts of my Will in the same manner as if he were not an Executor or Trustee of my Will.\n\n25. THE China and Curios in my wife's sitting room in my said house are her own property and do not belong to me.\n\n26. I RECOMMEND my Executors and Trustees not to dispose of my collection of porcelain and pottery without fully satisfying themselves that they are not selling it beneath its real value for I believe it to be very valuable and overtures have been made to me for the purchase of it at a very large sum.\n\n27 is not present, the original text jumps from 24 to 25 to 26. The next section continues with the attestation clause.\n\nIN WITNESS whereof I have to this sheet and the seven preceding sheets of paper containing this my Will set my hand this Seventeenth day of April One thousand nine hundred and twenty-five.\n\nSIGNED and ACKNOWLEDGED by the Testator as and for his last Will and Testament in the presence of us both being present at the same time who at his request in his presence and in the presence of each other have hereunto subscribed our names as witnesses:\n\n**(Sd.) C. P. CHATER.**\n\n**(Sd.) H. J. Armstrong,**\nSolicitor,\nHongkong.\n\n**(Sd.) C. A. P. XAVIER,**\nCashier to Messrs. Deacons,\nSolicitors,\nHongkong.\n\nPage 80\nPage 81",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550815,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 101,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "## Page 117\n\nThe Respondent is the State Duty Commissioner of Hong Kong.\n\nThe proceedings arise out of a decision by the State Duty Commissioner requiring the payment of estate duty on the cesser of an annuity bequeathed by the will of Sir Catchick Paul Chater to the deceased's wife, who is now dead.\n\nThe present appeal to the Privy Council is from a judgment of the Full Court of Hong Kong dismissing an appeal from the Judgment of His Honour Sir Atholl MacGregor, Chief Justice, which upheld the decision of the State Duty Commissioner.\n\nSir Catchick Paul Chater died at No. 1 Conduit Road, Victoria, Hong Kong, on the 27th March, 1926. He was domiciled in this Colony.\n\nHis will, dated the 17th April, 1925, and two Codicils both dated the 25th May, 1926, were duly proved in the Supreme Court of Hong Kong in its Probate jurisdiction, on the 9th September, 1926, by the Honourable Sir William Edward Leonard Shenton, Reginald Frederick Mattingly, and Lady Chater, the widow of the testator.\n\nThe said R.F. Mattingly died on the 29th December, 1926, and on the 11th March, 1927, Michael Howard Turner was appointed a Trustee of the said Will and Codicils, in the place of the said R.F. Mattingly, deceased.\n\nThe said Lady Chater died on the 11th March, 1935.\n\nThe present Trustees of the will and Codicils of the said Sir Catchick Paul Chater, deceased, are: Harold John Armstrong and Michael Howard Turner.\n\nBy clause 5 of the said will, the testator bequeathed an annuity of £10,000 sterling, clear of all death duties and income tax, to his said widow.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550816,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 102,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "118 \n\nThe relevant portion of the said clause 5 is as follows:\n\n5. I bequeath the following annuities all clear of all death duties and income tax payable to the respective persons hereinafter enumerated commencing from my death by equal quarterly payments the first payment in each case to be made at the expiration of Three months from my death:\n\n(a) To my wife during her life the annual sum of Ten thousand Pounds Sterling.\n\nBy clause 13 of the said Will the testator declared that his trustees should be at liberty, if they so thought fit, to set apart out of his residuary estate investments sufficient to produce the said annuity.\n\nThe text of Clause 13 is as follows:-\n\n13. I declare that my Trustees shall be at liberty if they so think fit to appropriate and set apart out of my residuary estate investments representing such a capital fund as shall at the time of appropriation be sufficient to produce the annual sums directed to be paid by Clause Five of this my will with such a liberal margin for contingencies as in the opinion of my Trustees shall be sufficient And I declare that when such appropriation has been made the said annual sums shall be wholly charged on the investments so appropriated in exoneration of the rest of my estate but that the capital of such appropriated investments may be resorted to in case at any time the income thereof is insufficient to pay any such annual sum or sums And I further declare that on \n\n-3-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 550817,
        "series_id": 27,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-co129-engine",
        "series_title": "CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "page_number": 103,
        "title": "CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936",
        "content_text": "119 \n\nthe cesser of any such annual sums, such part \nof the appropriated investments as shall not \nin the opinion of my Trustees be required for \nthe payment of the other annual sum or sums for \nthe time being payable under the trusts of this \nmy will, shall revert to and form part of my \nresiduary estate and that any surplus income \narising from the appropriated investments shall \nbe applied as income of my residuary estate. \n\nBy clause 8 of his will, the testator made the following \nprovision with regard to investment: \n\n### 8. \nSubject to the payment of my funeral and \ntestamentary expenses and debts and any \nlegacies bequeathed by this my Will or by any \nCodicil hereto, and the duty (if any) upon \nlegacies and annuities bequeathed free of duty, \nand subject to making provision for the payment \nof any annuities bequeathed by this my will or \nby any Codicil hereto, my Trustees shall invest \nin manner hereinafter authorised the proceeds \nof the said sale &c. \n\nThe foregoing provisions were not varied by either of the \nsaid Codicils. \n\nEstate Duty was paid on the whole of the testator's estate \nwhen the probate was obtained. \n\nNo fund was set aside to meet the said annuity, but the \nsame was paid out of the general income as and when the same \nbecame due (Vide paragraph 6 of the joint affidavit of the \nTrustees dated the 4th April, 1935). \n\nIt was agreed by the Trustees and the Commissioner that",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/2diw2n4r2/CO129-557-12 Armstrong and Turner v. Estate Duty Commissioner- appeal to Privy Council 18-5-1936 - 2-10-1936.txt",
        "external_url": "",
        "rank": 0
    }
]