1904-03-28 — Page 3

SUPREME COURT. Baturday, 26th March.

IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION. Beroes H HONOUR SIE WILLIAM M. GOODMAN (CHIEF JUSTICE).

3

KODAKS!! KODAKS!! KODAKS!!!

AND

PHOTO GOODS OF EVERY DESCRIPTION.

We have an Establishment Solely devoted to

DEVELOPING AND PRINTING

OHAN UT-CHIU AND PUN KAN SHAN V. CHU Crown and, subject to the provisions of the of any legal claim that may hereafter be made clamation, I have no dificilty in determining | for Amateurs, where we turn out work of the best description and with great promptness.

Mr.

or

THE HONGKONG DAILY PRESS, MONDAY, MARCH 28TH, 1904. |lack Sections and others fronting the said Praya dersigned Chu Chnen, Crown Lessee of Marine however, that I have not yet been equally Roadway, then the proportion of reclamation Lot No. 53 A, in consideration of the agreement fortunate with Yin Chow, the owner of allotted to the respective owners of such frontage extered into by me this day for the reclamation of Beations B and D, bat as his equitablo Sections has been determined by the respective the foreshore in front of the taid Lot, under proportion is so small that he could not build lengths of such frontages along the Prays the Praya Reclamation Ordinance, 1889, hersby upon it in conformity with the Building Agreement of the Reclamation Ordinance, Roadway ie, the extent of the Hne of frontage. guarantee either to assign an equitable pro-

ho may see that it is desirable to sell Before dealing with the specific facts of this portion of the said reclamation, or to pay an

it may be well to point out that Section 6 equivalent in money to the owner of Sections his interest as Mr. Stephens has done" It seoma to me that Yin Chow rightly wanted the Ordinance is very sweeping. The intended B, C and D of the said Lot. I hereby also whole of the dispnted portion of the Re. reclamation is declared to be the property of the agree to indemnify the Government in respect

that Chu Chaen's contention was wrong, and Ordinance, the Governor has conferred upon against it in respect of the mail Reclamation.” LEE AND CHU PING.

Bruce Shepherd's evidence continued that Yin Chow was entitled (had he urged his claim to de so, to sign the articles of agroment lands, as follows:-"I spoke to Yin Chow as His Lordship delivorel judgment in the above him full power to deal with it in the same way

well as to Chu Chuen before the guarantes for the whole. My difficulty arises out of the ease. Hoa, H. E. Follock, K.C., and Mr. E. Is he can deal with other Crowa The words of the section are as follows:

settled signed. Neither of them fact that to did not do so. If he had gone to 6. All the land and foreshore and bed of way

Live Court at the time to determine what the Sharp, K.C. (instructed by Mr. T. Harding of Messrs. Twens and Hurston, solicitors), appeared

I told both inequitable proportion was, the answer would for the plaintiffs; and Mr. M. W. Blada the sen to be reclaimed under this ordinance. could agree us to how the equitablo pro-

and all the land ceeupied by the

mean the whole, I whole." Before I pass to the more recent corres roadway, and wall along the line of the intended Chow und Chu Chuen that the equitable have then been, It means, in this case, the reclamation, is hereby declared to be absolutely proportion" could not the property of the Queen, free from any took the words" equitable proportion out of pendence, I may point out that the payments made by Chn Chuen, or by the defendants, his restriction whatever, and the Governor shall the Ordinance (Section 7)

It looks therefore as if Yin Chow bad ccessor in respect of the disputed portion

BIRDS 19th December. 1889 ' have power, subject to the provisions of this ordinance, to deal with the same and to dispose contended that he was entitled to the whole or of the reckmation were

3,189.88 21st August, 1899 of the same for building or any other purpose in it would not have been necessary to discuss the same way had to us full extent, as is whether the equitable proportion could or

3.189,89 29th June, 1900. whole. It is, in my opinion,

1.594.94 29th February, 19900 the cases of other Crown Lands; and all pro. ld not mean

1,594.05 15th January, 1993 perty, ostate, rights or supposed rights and fairly clear that Yin Chow wanted with easements or supposed esements of any persons was entitled to, viz., all the Reclamation now in or class of persons, whether Crown leaseholders dispute, but that Chu Chen and those who or licensee or otherwise, to the user or pos- then advised him, claimed the greater part, for ssion or ocupation of in ver or in any way Chu Chuen, and being more pushing aud in relation to much land, forshore, bad of the resolute that Yin Chew. Chu Chuen get He, embankment, reclamation, or praya road-way permission to sign or condition that he settled and wall,or in relation to any wharf, landing the just chims of others. place, pier, or other pluce, itiate thereupon, are hereby declared to be absolutely extinguished and determined."

Gedge, of Messrs. Johnson, Stokes and Muster, solicitors), appeared for the defendants. The case was armed on 14th and 15th March.

His Loriship in delivering judgment said This is an action brought by the plaintiffs to determine the respective rights of themselves and the defondants, with regard to a certain portion of the Prays Reclamation which is situated in front of Marine Lot 59 (A.) The plaintiffs ask that it should be declared by this Court that they are entitled to the area of reclaimed land marked red on the plao annexed to

It is owing to the wrong man haring bean allowed to sign what purported to be articles of agreement under the Oulinance that the present difficulty has arisen.

In all $12,759,54

It will be observed that after the first

certain articles of Agreement between one Chy Chuon and Mr. Bruce Shepherd, on behalf of the Governor of Hongkong duted 5th October 1889; that is to say to such proportion (from front to back) of the whole of the Reclamation to Marine Lot 53 (A), as the frontage of the plaintiff's property, Station B and D of the

It seems olear, therefore, that all duims except said Lot upon the old Prays, bears to the whee frontage of Marine Lot 58 (A) upon the said those provided for by the Ordinance are ex Both Yin Chow and Chu Chuon are dead, roadway. The defendants, who are sued as the tinguished. What claims then does the Ordinand the plaintiffs and defendants now stand in their respective places and, seeing that the cost executors of que Chu Chuon, decessed, dony, in

Section 7 deals with tires. It commences as of the 5,556 muare foot of reclamation in dispate paragraph of their defence, that the plaintifsance provide for? are entitled, upon the true constraction of the

follows: whereas the Crown leases or their was ander $13,000, while its present value is ALLY Praya Reclamation Ordinance, 1889, to part of the Reclamation and they plead that assignees registered in the Land Registry Office estimated as not far off $100,00, it is easy reclaimed land. When originally Marine Latsance in respect of the loss of land of sections equitable proportion is being vigorously fought thereof fronting the Fraya Boadway along the were first granted they had on notaal line of the proposed Reclamation (which per frontage, but Marine Let 53 (A) which, I presume, occupied the site of partof oue of the some with their execiters, administrators and Chuen and the Colonial Secretary before the The plaintiffs, accordingly. in July. 1901, paid

LONG, HING & CO..

Hongkong, 10th March, 1904.

SOLE

17A, QUEEN'S ROAD CENTRAL

(Few Doors East of Hongkong Hotel).

148

ARNHOLD. KARBERG & CO.

ELECTRICITY DEPARTMENT.

AGENTS IN CHINA FOR:

THE ALLGEMEINE ELECTRICITATS: GESELLSCHAFT, BERLIN. MEARS. KOERTING BROS., HANNOVER.

THE COMPANY OF WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY, BERLIN. MERA. MIX & GENEST, BERLIN.

PRIVATE ELECTRIC LIGHTING PLANS A SPECIALI) Y' Fully detailed Estimates drawn up free of charge upon application to the above. Hongkong 3rd December, 1903.

THE LAHMEYER

ELECTRICAL

LONDON,

AND

393

CO.. LD..

ELECTRIZITAETS ACTIEN GESELLSCHAFT VORM. · W. LAHMEYER & CO., FRANKFURT A/M.

they (the defendants) are in possession of such at the date of the commoscement or this Ordini understand that, the question of what is the from the name of Yin Chow, the plaintiff pro- FOR ESTIMATES OF ELECTRICAL INSTALLATIONS OF ANY DESCRIPTION

original Praga, o rand 50 feet wide running original Marine Lots, had its seaward froutego along between the horses and the sea or waters of the barbour. Marine Lot 53 (A) appears tohare beon originally demised by the Crown, in April, 1859, to one Ivao Bapists Gomes for a term of 994 years and when so domised was not bounded by the sea, but by the old Praya. The boundaries are described as the Fraya on

assigns, except where reguant to the context unjority of them, hats already declared or are hereinafter refered to as lesseest or the signified their reaches to contribute towards the cost to be incared for and in connection with the works autorised by this Ordinance, provided the Gofnor will grant to them, respectively, Crow Leases of such equitable proportion of the rapoand reclamation as may

It will condte to clearness if I hero point out that the king of the word "lessees" for the purposes this Section is defined by the first few lines the Section as the Crows Lessee or nasiges not of a back Section but of a lot fronting old Prays or (if the lot is divided into Stions) of a Section thereof fronting the old raya.

.

to

This throws tht on the words "Sud quitable proports of the proposed reclamation as may be availle having regard. the claims of at lesston." The other lesscos whose claims are be considered are frontagers not back Becta holders. Marine Lot 53 (there were 3 Sections front-

out.

Chu

There was correspondance between articles of agreement were outered into. Chu inter alia,that although 1.526 feet of reclamation Chuen wrote on 27th July, 1889, complaining, had been allotted him in respect of his "romaining portion of M. Lot 53 (A), yet allotted to him in nothing had been respect of Section A. which as he alleged comprised more than half the area of the whole of Marine Lot 53. Of course, the reason was

to inform you that as regards sub-section A of M. Lot 68 ard Section A of Marine Lot 83(A) the lands in question having no marine frontages have no moral claim on foreshores such as bas been held to attach to land haring such frontage." Chu Chuen. however, wrote back (letter 1st October, 1829) urging his claim "as the register ed Crown Leaseholder of Marine Lot 53A and the actual ownerof nearly seven-eighths of the Lot" and saying "Is not every part owner of a Marine Lot entitled to share in the bouefits of the Praya Extension? Can any Ordinance of the Legislative Cemucil over-ride the provisions of my Crown lease. &c. &e!

contribution was paid, the same day as the undertaking was given. ao further contribution was requirit till August, 1899, after both Xin Chow and Chu Chuen were dead. That may, at least partly, explain some of the delay in these proceedings, for the reclamation in front of Lot 5x was not begun until somo years after the articles of agreement were made. When the further instalment of contribution was required, application for payment was made by the Teasury to the plaintiffs instead of to the defendants. This mistake probably araso

mentioned in the Schedule, in the Government decessor as owner of Stations B and D, wing uotitication of 1889, previously referred to. the sun claimed instead of informing the Trea cannot see how that affects the question; for when the mistake was discovered a refund of sury of the mistake, and got a receipt. But I

the money was offered and the defendunts have also paid the amount to the Treasury, so that whichever party is entitled to get the money back. wit doubtless is permitted to do so. On 10th January, 1903, the plaintiff's solicitors wrote to the defendants asking them to assent

Apply to

SIEMSSEN & CO., SOLE AGENTS FOR CHINA.

BOWLING,

HONGKONG CLUB . THE NAVY. The Navy, having beaten a Club team earlier in the month, on Friday and Saturday last challenged the full strength of the Hongkong Club. The resuit was a good match and a victory for the lub by 378. The winners had two obanges from the team which defeated the

Vivian also had two scores each over 200. On.

putting on 277 on No. 4. Hinds, Gray, and Friday the Club led by 184 points; the final scores were as follows :—

the north, Queen's Road on the south, Marina be available, harig regard to public require that Section A bed no frontage on the old Praya. Lot 18 on the west, and "a close registered" in {ments in respectif the roads and streets to be Accordingly, on 30th Sept., he gets a letter to the Crown Lease of the disputed portion of the Land Office as Marine Lot 53 (being the made on the lai when reclaimed und in the from the Colonial Secretary's office to the fol. the reclamation being granted to them on repay. Club Germania, W. A. Sins playing for contre line of a private party lane, fifteen feet case of each loss having regard, to the clains lowing effect:- I am directed by the Governor Bent of the contributiens, i.e. the cost of i wide)" on the east. In course of time the Crown of their lassecs, c. &c. Lessed assigned various sections of this Lot to others. In 1881 Yin Chow became unsignes of Sections E. and D. In 1882 Chu Chnen became Assignee of Section A. In 1988 Chu Chuen also become assignee of a Section called the remaining portion and Mr. M. J. Stephens at some date, which was not stated, but prior to 1839, became assignee of Section C. The Prays Reclamation Ordinance, No. 16 of 1859, was passed on 10th May, 1889, and, nt that date, the various Sections of Marins Lot 53 (A) were held as follows:--Section B & D wore held by one Yin Chow. Sections C. was held by Mr. M. J. Stephens. Section A and that part called "the remaining portion" ofing the Prays the proportion of the reparticipate, and that an Ordinance of the Marine Lot 53 (4) were held by one Chm Chuen. The Marine Lot, takon as a whole. oxtended, arfl have stated, from Queen's Road to the oid Praya, now known as Des Voeux Road. Section C franted the Queen's Road. Section Ban fronted the olit Praya Suction A was bounded on the north by Sections B and D and so did act front the old Prava at all, although by the deed of assignment, 31st July 1882, Chu Chuon the purchaser, had granted to 1882, free and uninterrupted right of ingress, egrose and regress in, to, oror and upon and way and user of the

In the case of

clamation allott in respect of each of the Sections was portioned to their respective frontages in thiontages of Sections B and D and of the reining portion," on the Prays Roadway.

As regards land and the strip fronting on the Prays, kas "the remaining portion" of Marine Lat (A) Cha Chen entered into He agreed by such Articles of Agment. articles to paertain contributions, which I understand been duly paid, and became entitled (mabjeco payment of any extra con- Remaining portion

TRADE

TELEPHONE No. 135.

FRENCH IS

MARK

MARTELL'S

• $25.00 PER DOZEN,

*** 831.00 PER DOZEN,

V. SO P. $51.00 PER DOZEN.

[58

W. B. Walker, who is out of practice, and THE FAVOURITE BRANDY OF THE making the roclamation with interest at 8 per cent. The defendants' solicitors declined. Hancock coming in at the last moment for to asent, but said their clients were prepurail J. Hooper (who was indisposed) and doing very to assign an equitable proportion to the owner

creditably The feature of the match was Sectious F İ D. After further correspradence. the defendunts solicitors Bonnar's excellent bowling, for he scored over 200 | on all four alleys. Ford was very consistent for i wrote to the solicitors for the plaintiffs, ou

the Navy and bad two scores over 200. He and February 5th, 1903, saying:-"According to

Chater tied for the best score en ene alley, sach our minds there can be no possible doubt us to the construction of the Praya Ordinance and that the Crown Lesser of Murine Lot, 53 A, is the only person recognised by the Governor in bis agreement with such Crown Lessee, to curry out the Reclamation, and that he is a trusster The proper legal answers to these questions in respect of the lots of land or sections thereof for liff and for the owners of the other were that back section owners could not sections of the Marine Lat. Do you agree that this is so? It sooms to us that the only decren either of us could get under the Praya Rection- Legislative Council approved by the Crown can if necessary over-ride the provisions of my

tion Ordinance would be that each of our clients lease, as was expressly decided in Pyrie's case. Finally, on 6th December, 1889, Mr. Lister, the is entitled to an equitable proportion of the lot Acting Colonial Secretary, writes to say, "His which we have already offered you. There is no Excellency is advised that you may be per object, therefore, in stating a special care. The mitted to sign the agreement in connection with only matter that requires settlement is to as certain that is the equitable proportion." &e. &c. the Prays Reclamation in respect of the whole To this letter the plaintiffs solicitor realiod. lot upon your guaranteeing either to assign an equitable propertion of the reclamation or to on 6th February, 1903, that they claimed for their dients the whole and continue as pay an equivalent in money both to Mr. Stephus, follows Wa think that there is no possible who owns Section of the Lot, and to

182 153 141 doubt as to the construction of the Prys Re-10-Mr. Brown...

a clause

#--T. C. Gray 7--F. Maitlasad -H. Hancock 12--W. A. Eins 15 J. E. Le

CLUB.

J

V. V. 8. O. P. 393,00 PER DOZEN,

4-E. H. Hinds

1 4 Tutai 1-J. W. C. Bonnar... 244 2214 203 215 169 137 153 277 3--C. P. Chater

221 130 210 176 2/8 204 130 180 178 190 165 191 201 168 144 187 195 12 161 14

870 750 740 731 720 680 032

Even their cheapest quality is recommended

19 114 13 12

327

by the Medical Faculty for Invalids and

delicate people.

Total.....

5,655

NAVY.

229 107 142 277 a 178 138

201

615 733

193 116 177 226

712

141 150 140

91 109 123

183 638 200 160 167 130 183 169 133 110 189 174

€37 620 G10

501

5.278

378

2-Lt. Ford... S-Lt. Vivien

Lt. Gibeon...

14-16, Warburg........... the effest of the Ordinance is to give to oroots of 13-Mr. Edwards. 16-Lt. Boemquet sections fronting the old Praya," of Marine Lots, the entire Reclamations in front of such sections.

They

for

Total

Majority in favour of club

coloured blue on le plan.' The Remaining tributions vidhight become payable under Mr. Yin Chow, who owns Sections B and D. portion" was a Section which included the land the third clause claim (when Crown Lens His Erelluney understands that you are willing/clamation Ordinance and we are advised that | 11-Dr. Horiey..

are granted), aown Lease of the portion of to adopt the course enggested. I am to add the Reclamation iminuted on the plan annend however, that it will be necessary to meile

The whole in

the agreement referred to to those Articlof Agreement. of the rest of treclamation in front of M.L. indemnifying the Government in respect of any 58 (A), now inpute, was by the schedule claim, that may hereafter be made against it in allotted to Yin, the other frontager, as relation to the Lots and any grant of reclam

tion in connection therewith. I am, therefore, owner of Sectios and D.

to request you to be good enough to place your self in early communistion with the Land Office with a view to crying out the above arrangements." We now see how Chu Chuen. came to be allowed to sign the agreement which one would have expected to find Yin Chow sign ing. Mr. Bruce Shepherd in cross examination stated, "When I asked Yiu Chow to sign the R4- claration Agreement he could have done so if he Yin Chow did not seera anxious to

between Section A and the Queen's Read (except Section C) and the long narrow strip of land, constituting one half of the narrow private lane, extending from Queen's Rond to the Praya, and thus had a frontage on the of this sotion, At the date Payn

held Band D. formerly the plaintiffs held by their predecessor in title Yin illed izk 1893 and the Chow, who defendants held Section A and the remaining portion "of Marine Lot 53 (A). by devolution of the property from Chn Climen, who died in 1898. The whole of the frontage, therefore, on the old Pruyn, of Marine Let 53A was taken up by Sections Bund Dand the"emaining portion." Assuming that rights to the reclamation to

It seems strajthat Yin Chow should not within the stata two months from 6th July 1889 (the date of Notification in the Gazelle) have formally sited in writing, his accop tance of the portof the Reclamation assigned to him in the fine. If he had done so, there was no lawbjection that I can see to prevent his beingwed, and I think it pro- bable that be woyave been allowed, to enter

You, however, are contending that the owners to share in such reclamations." of back sections of Marine Lols are entitled then suggest stating a special ons decision. Later on, it appears, that what the defendants considered the equitable proportion and were prepared to assign, was a block of 237 square feet out of the 5,853 in dispute:

between The parties could not suren, and after further

the correspondence

defondants' solicitors and the Colonial Secretary, the defendants were permitted, at their request, to enter into a possessory agreement for tho reclamation on condition that they gave a fresh

2 3 ¿ Totul

POLICE COURT,

Saturday, 26th March. Bercas MR, T. SaɛCOMED SMITE (POLICE MAGISTRATE),

THEFTS.

Wong Hing was charged with entering a house in Bonham Strand, occupied by hinese

SOLE AGENTS

II. PRICE & CO.

12, QUEEN'S ROAD CENTRAL

ROYAL

BAKING POWDER

Absolutely Puro

To be used always for raising cake, scones, hot tea-biscuits,

Indispensable where

the finest food

is required.

be made ander the Pruva Reclamation Or. into the Articles[greement specified in the had wished.” inance, 1889, were only given by that O. Ordinance. If hidone so he would, on pay sign. Ithink he wasafraid of Chu Chuen's cnim undertaking to the same efect as Chu Chuen's! diance to frontagers, i.e., to persons whos Lotient of the contion specified and any extra and Chu Chaen was very, vigorously urging his previons undertaking, "namely, either to assign families, må stealing a jacket therefrom, the rolls, muffins, crusts, etc.

to pay an equivalent in money to the orners of property of an inmate. A fobi was watching if they held the whole lot) or whose Sections of / Payments that mibecome las, have become claim and seeking to establish a right for back an equitable proportion of the Reclamation or those Lots (if the Lots were broken up nuited entitled to a Crofense iu duo ecurso of the section owners to participate in the new reclama-

fion. Now I am asked to say what is this equitable Sections B und D and also to indemnify the bim, and when he came out of the house carrying

Government against all claims which may a jacket the foki arrested him and took him to! in dispute.

proportion" to which Yin Chow's successors are on the old Prays, it is clear that the plaintiffs' very portion of teclamation which is now predecessor in title, Yin Chow, was entitled to

Mr. Bruce Shed in his evidence, gives entitled. They claim tube entitled to the whole on hereafter be made respecting the Roelama. came in ander that Ordinance as frontager, in

some explanation le matter. He said "I the ground that Chu Chuen really miast to takon tion." Now, I hold, that Chu Chuen's claim the station. Inspector Gourlay was in charge respect of Sections B nad D, and that the

tried to get Mr. Thow to sign the Agree to have entered into this articles of grenent was founded upon a misconception of the true con- of the cae, and testified to the bringing in of defendant's predecessor in title, Chu Chen,

ment as the front of B and D before the as trustee for, or on behalf of, the owners of struction of the Prazu Reclamation Ordinance. the prisoner on the 25th inst. Frisoner was

Government when

hnd was entitled to come in, de a frontager in respect undertaking of December" (what this Sections R and D, and of course express their It is dear that he pressed that claim strongly searched, and on him were found a number of

It is also

nadertaking was be explained later on). willingness to repay to him (or the defendants the remaining portion.

the

Detective-Sergeant Sullivan, that, clear

"It would be durihe month of November. that assumption,

as his representatives) with interest at 8 per been 30 decision of the Courts upon the point Pawn-tickels, relating to obthing, brass pipes.

to guile the Government, and was only allowed etc. holders of Sections C and A were not untitled: He said he wante buy the Godowns on

cent, all the contributions towards the ex- Section A and hed not sign anything or penses of the Reclamation which he has had to sign the agreement on condition that he stated that he had made onquiries about the to come in under the Ordinance and daim any

gave an undertaking certainly intended to have reclamation. When the

agree to anythinghe could Bottle with Cha to put under the articles of agreement. part of the

in sub- specified

Cheum (who was an old man) about the further plan

The defendants, on the other hand, contend the effect of preventing fles just claims of others articles pawned by prisoner, and found they had section (1) of Section 7 of the Fraya Reclama-

purchase of SecA and the remaining that Yin Chow, not having signifie bis being ignored and not intended to decide the bean all reported stolen during the last fortnight, tion Ordinance and the Schedule (containing a

portion."

"Chenu, however, reinsed acceptance within the two months from the respective merits either of his claim or that of He had therefore entered five additional charges On visiting the houses the frontagers, and, indeed, in his letter of 4th against the prisoner. to soll to Yinow and Yin. Cbow date of the notification of July 6th, 1889, us List of the levscos) unrexed to the plan.

March, 1908, to the plaintiffs' solicitors, the are referred to it appears that Yin Chow is then said to me it would be better for required by the Ordinauce, and not having

uf

On

Qu

they

thero

sworn,

entered as registered Crown Leases of Bections him to wait for Chaon's death and Den entered into any articles of agreement under Colonial Secretary expressly said "I am direct. from which the things had been stolen, ho found |

+

Indeed it came

stocks.

The medical officer of health and public analyst for the city of London, England, reports the ROYAL a Baking Powder chemi cally pure and giving the maxi- mum possible yield of leavening

gas.

ROYAL BAKING POWDER - re- tains its strength and freshness under the variable temperature and moisture of every climate.

Manufactured by

Royal Baking Powder Co.

[41

NEW YORK, U. S. A.

1567

DENTISTS.

that the prisoner had the same excuse lessee of the remaining portion" of Marine leaper. Upon tatecided that Chu Chuen to the position of those who might ask for power unter the Reclamation Ordinace 1889 for entering, saying he was looking for

to settle disputes of title. Such disputes must

a friend," but whom, strange to say, he never It Lot 53 (A). The Schedule which was published should sign the agent and enter into the compensation from the Governor under sub-

bottled by the parties themselves."

His Worship sertion G of Section 7 Moreover, they con

is of course in the Gazelle and contained in Government

the province of the Court found, taking clothing instead. This was accordi done, and Chu Chuen tend, that when the undertaking or guarantee and not that of the Governor to decide santenced List 1 month's hard labour on Notification No. 301, dated 6th July 1889, shows garantes which h? that the length of Yin Chow's frontage was 41 entered into the vereement which, but for

was given, Clin Chuen serer intended for one

the true construction of the Ordinance. his singular condul the matter Yin Chow fest é inoles in respect of Sections B and D

The first question to decide then is, to what each count, making a total of 6 months, and Yin Chow is to get the whole. while Chu Chuen's frontage in respect of the ought to have autoso. Indeed, the original moment that under the words "equitable pro

portion

Li Lan was convicted on a similar charge as remaining portion was 10 feet 9 inches. The agreement was mad in Via Chow's name n

out in the correspondence portion of the disputed reclamation Xin Chow is also 6 hours in the stocks. area of proposed reclamation assignable to ready for him to, and he is therein that Chu Chuen actually paid Mr. Stephens, titled as frontages. My answer is the

the owner of back section C, $2,000, to settle whole." That being so, has Yin Chow or have the abort, and given 6 weeks and 6 hours in the was entered as 585 square feet for described as Crowns of Section D and lesso88"

the plaintiffs as his representatives so conductel Tin Chow and 1526 sq. ft, for Chu Chuen, the Section B, but this mck out, a line being his claim to a part of the reclamation. themselves in the master as to make it unfair drawn through his and Chu Chuen signs Chu Chuen disputed the view that the

Wong Luk, who pleaded guilty to similar DE. NEWELL WILSON. DE. WILLIAM DANED "estimated cost of making the zoclamation

and inequitable that the defendants should be was $2.18 square foot, and the respective and is described as Lossec of Marine Lot

Ordinancs, properly read, conferred no rights hold trustees for the whole? It seems to me charge, and admitted a presious conviction, was estimated amounts of contribution were: 58, though article 5 agrement contains whatever to share in the reclamation upon any Yin Chow, $12,759, and Chu Chun, 33,026, this proviso prd always that nothing but frontagers, so zulurally had to apply kis that, if the plaintiffs are willing to refund sent to 3 months' hard labour, with 6 hours'

with interest at 8 per cant. the $2,000 paid No provision was made by the plan and in this agreement zed shall be held to

been held that where there is a doubtful point. be given to any but frontagers, so the holder of give the Lesse ant or rights over the principles to Mr. Stephens' claim. Now, it has by Chu Chuen to Mr. J. D. Stephens and the stocks, and recommended for banishment from " schedule for any portion of the reclamation to

new foreshore or oths in respect of or in

of law such as a question respecting the con. money contributed by Chu Chuen and the the Colony. Soption a back Section, is not mentioned in connection with them of the reclamation struction of a will, there is nothing whatever defendnuts towards the cost of making the

Projs, I ought to decree that the Crown Tang Chuk Hong,a compradore to a Japanese the schedule, nor is Section A referred to at all hereby agreed to be ed to him, of a nature to prevent a compromis, and though, naturally, Leo of the whole disputed portion of the firm, was charged with heing in possession of This system of allowing only frontagers to different to or in n greater or less than

one party must be wrong in his view, yet he ecmation ought to be granted (on payment excess opium, Evidence was led to shose that come in was the system regularly followed such lesson may hay in respect of or in

cannot afterwards seek relief on the ground as boing it accordance with the Ordinance. connection with the Marine Lot, 53 A, mistake assuming compromise was fairly enter of any farther contribution that may become the acensed, as soon as the excise officer entered Seet. D, 53 A Sectionmediately before the inte. But I see no evidence that Yin Chow due as final soitlement of the Prays Reclama- the door, threw the opium into the street, where there may have been some special agreement or coming into operatigia Ordinance.

a party to any compromise or to the signing tion accounts) to the plaintiffs or, if granted to it was found. The tin was found to contain It is clear howore immediately before

As the road, which could not be enlouiated.. He contract between the frontager and some other

plaintiffs pre- was fined $25. person: If the Ordinance is carefully read and the coming into op of the Ordinance, by Chu Chuen of the articles of agreements defendants, that the land must be held seven mace, but a quantity had leaked out on to considered it will be found that the claims of Chu Chuca had no lay regard, with the undertaking attached, or that Yin Chow by them in trust for the plaintiffs.

was consulted about the terms of the under regards costs, I think the

decessor was to blame for not showing some holders of back sections of Marino Lots to be B and D. Attachos Agreement is an

3,009 NEWSPAPERS. taking. It seems clear that Cha Chuen supposed diligence in asserting his rights during his entitled to any part of the reclamation are not undertaking signed Chuen dated 19th

that, in giving that undertaking he was only life time, and allowing himself to be overlozne EECOMEND MACNIVEN & CAMERON'S PENS. recognised by it at all. It seems too that the December 1839, whichderstand to be the

THE WAVERLEY Ps, for Esay Writing to assign some small portion of the

THE ILTING SCOTCHMAN P, instead of a Quill. practice has always been that the proportion of date he actually aig Articles of Agros-resistion to Yiu Chow because, in his letter, by Chu Cheun's vigorous assertion of his claims

THE FLYING J. writes 200 worda per dip. Sold reclamation allotted to holders of Marine Lotement (that is after tutory three months),

of 20th December, 1889, to the Colonial also consider the defendants' predecessor to

[02--1 fronting the Praya Roadway along the line of which had been provisade out in realiness Borctary he says he has settled with Mr.Stephens have been wrong in his constraction of the Lot has been split up into Sections, some being dertaking is in the fg words. the un

I am not how speaking of any special case where

#

af

OPIUM

the 'rechmation, or, where any such Marine and had been dated other 1889, That" an by paying $2,000 and continues, "I rogrot, Ordinance. I therefore decide that each sido f at all Flationer, WAVERLEY WORKS, EDINBURGH.

should bear its own costs.

Latest American Methods,

Reasonable Fees.

No charge for examinations,

Office hours 9 AM. to 1 P.M, and 2 to 5P.M.

31, QUEEN'S ROAD] CENTRAL (First Floor Walkin's Building). Hongkong, 18th February, 1984,