1928-02-07 — Page 4

HENRY HEATH

save me cuma, TiusŠANU VLANS DE DAT MARİNTİ

LTO

Quite naturally, the man who knows that appearance does count selects a HENRY HEATH Hat with the certainty that by so doing he secures advantage of style, quality and durability.

NEWEST LONDON STYLES NOW SHOWING.

Mackintosh's

MEN'S WEAR SPECIALISTS Alexandra Building.

Des Vanx Road.

DAIRY FARM NEWS.

GAME - REDUCED PRICES.

but

QUALITY MAINTAINED

$1.35 each 81.00 $1.00 .40

22

COCK PHEASANTS

HEN

WILD DUCK

TEAL

PIGEONS"

SNIPE

30

ORDER EARLY.

.35

THE DAIRY FARM, ICE & COLD STORAGE CO., LTD.

Though Old, Matured and

of a High Quality,"

MARCHANT'S WHISKY

costs, no more than other Brands, but-

what a difference in the taste!

Not a "bite" in the whole bottle!

Don't make the mistake

of askin, fer

Whisky and Soda;

ORDER,

ALWAYS,

“MARCHANT'S WHISKY & SODA"

and

Buy a Bottle for the House.

Obtainable from the leading stores or the Sole Agents:

T.

E. GRIFFITH, LTD.

6, Queen's' Road Central.

C

Tel. 3517.

4.P.3, 14].

Lubricoats SOCONY MOTOR OIL'

THE HONG KONG DAILY PRESS, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7th, 1928.

PLANS FOR THIRTY HOUSES.

STORY OF THE BUILDING BOOM.

ARCHITECT'S CLAIM FOR FEES,

A dispute arising cut of architectural foss, charged in respect of the preparation in 1634 of plans for thirty uses in Kowloon came before the Chief Justice (Sir Henry Gollan) at the Supreme Court yesterday.

Mr. E. D. Shank, managing director of the Hong Kong Ex- cavation, Pile Driving and Construction Company, claimed 80,731 in respect of architectural services, from Liuie Lung. 9, Connaught Road.

It was suggested by counsel for plaintiff that defendant at the time of the building boom was anxious to push on with the work, but when the boom slackened he did not proceed with the scheme, and had now repudiated the arrangement for architect's fees.

Mr. C. G. Alabaster, K. C., is appearing for plaintiff, and Mr. F. C. Jenkin for defendant. Mr. Alabaster explained the ser- vices for which the claim was made,

giving dates of visits to the P.W.D., surveying of site, preparation of site plan and lay cut plan for thirty houses, sketch plan, working draw ings, etc.

Defendant denied, in his state ment of defence, that he employed the plaintiff as architect, stating that in August, 1024, he agreed with plaintiff as to the fee to be charged by him in respect of the preparation of plans and specifica- tions of the houses to be erected on Kowloon Inland Lot No. 546 and as to the work to be covered by such fee. The statement of defenen declared that defendant did not approve of the sketch plan and returned it for alteration, and re- submission, since when he had not seen it again. He had never given instruction for the work done other than the preparation of the sketch plan and did not admit that such work had, in fact, been done. None was necessary for the preparation of the sketch plan.

In March, 1925, plaintiff sent de- fendant a bill in which fees were

A BODYGUARD'S WAGES.

CURIOUS CASE AGAINST CHINESE.

Mr. Wadeson said that Mr. Harris had been employed by the defendant but was dismissed at the end of September, During Septer. ber he understood that Mr. Harris instructed Mr. A. E. Hall to write to the defendant asking for salary which was in arrear. Eventually, Mr. Harris was re-engaged in the

DEFENCE SUGGESTION OF Savoy Hotel.

FABRICATION.

Plaintif took his belongings to a Des Voeux Road West address on December 2nd and continued to A curious case was board at the stay there on and of natil JanuarY Summary "Court yesterday morn Harris to take his box away. th, when the defendant told Mr. ing, before Mr. Justice J. R. Wood Plaintiff went and air. Wadeon when a European, Mr. E. Harris,understood that the defendant paid alleged that he had acted as per-

Afr. Harris 820 and said he had not sonal bodyguard to Mr. Tang Sanhad been employed Mr. Harris had more money with him, While he Kan, of the Hung Tak Motor Boat received money to pay certain bills. Co, of 11-13, Lee Yuen Street Defendant owned a number of West.

motor boats and Mr. Harris had to Mr. Harris sued Mr. Tang San meet him each night at Blake Pier Kan for 410, which he claimed and stay with him. was due to him

ng wages for of January, under a verbal agree December and the first seven days ment entered into on December 1st agreed to pay Mr. Harris 8340 s of last year by which defendant

agreed at two per cent. of total cost. In the early Autumn defend- menth.

ant had an interview with the plain tiff in which he stated that he had changed his mind about the type of houses to be erected and instead houses he wanted plaintiff to pre- of wishing them to be tenement pare a new set of plans for the new type of houses, the fees for old Defendant was to return in a fort- and new type to be agreed on later. night and give instructions in re- spect of the new proposal, re-appearance, a letter was written As defendant did not put, in a by plaintiff's solicitors, setting out the claim now mande. The answer of the defendant was to the effect that general working plans were never authorised at all, only the preparation of the sketch plans, The sketch plan, continued counsel, was only partiet the general plans prepared by plaintiff.

Defendant further stated that he These, continued counsel, were em- had required certain alterations. bodied in the general plana and were given to by a Mr. Leung (who at that time was connected with the plaintiff and also it had now ant) to be handed to the defendant been ascertained with the defend

the altered plans. Defendant denied having received

Plaintiff had done the general plans and considered the charges made reasonable.

Defendant, indicated Mr. Alabas ter, was prepared to pay $500 only.

The parties first did business to gether in 1923, plaintiff taking up some agricultural lots for the de- fendant. The fee had been settled and paid in respect of this, De

Counsel added that now the de- lots to be converted into building the Government having resumed fendant desired these agricultural fendant and lost the land altogether. lots to build under what was know possession that they were not con- as the Forty Years' Lease Scheme.cerned with that.. Instructions were given by the de- fendant to push on with the scheme tiff, gave evidence for the rest of Three witnesses, including plain, of conversion and the building.

In March, 1024, plaintiff submitted the day's hearing. There WAS a charge of four and a half per lengthy cross-examination by Mr. cent. on actual cost of the buildings,

Jenkin. the fee to include supervision work: This offer was not accepted, an other arrangement being come to later. The lots were converted and considerable correspondence took place with the Public Works De- partment relative to the conversion.versation took place about March Both witnesses agreed that a con- Counsel referred to this corres 25th at which the "plans were re pondence and indicated that a fur- ther offer by the plaintiff relative ferred to. Defendant then said he did not think he wanted to pro- to feas was made in July 192 ceed with the houses, but that he plaintiff indicating that he was pre would give further instructions: A pared to undertake the architecMr. Edwards acted as interpreter. tural work in conection with the erection of the houses at three per employed in plaintiff's firm, gave Mr. Foster. Turner, who was then cent, of total cost of construction, corroborative evidence. fee not to include supervision,

Written Confirmation. Awritten confirmation was re- ceived, from the defendant the next thonth which, apart from any other evidence, counsel claimed, was suf- ficient for the plaintiff's case.

In his reply, the defendant stated that he found the cost exceeded that of other architectural fees but

he would accept it in view of the close friendship, existing between the parties. the price to include any other alteration affected after the plans had been approved. The letter also requested co-operation in supervision to eliminate poor materials and plaintiff must also secure permission from the Govern-

ment to instal meters so that the

houses would be supplied with water. There were also stipulations. with regard to proper levels.

Meters,

E. D. Shank, who spoke as to the The first witness called was Mr.

negotiations between the parties. and he also referred to interviews, Evidence was also given by Mr. C. B. Shank,

In cross-examination, Mr. Jenkin referred witness to a letter in which defendant said he had not autho- rised any such.-sketch plans, but that as some plans had been drawn up, he (defendant) would pay 8500 in respect of these, Mr. Turner said that came as a surprise to him.

Witness replied that he did not suitable for European occupation know. In reply to a further ques and that the P.W.D. reserved the tion, he added that they might have right to remove such meters in the come form the original file, but event of the houses being used as he could not say. Chinese tenement houses.

It was stated in evidence that t

was plaintiff's duty to follow the defendant about at night, and he had other minor tasks to perform such as interpreting for him at stated, often went about with large the pictures. Defendant, it was sums of money on him

Mr. R. A. Wadeson, of Messra.

Mr. Justice Wood: What was he? A mrt of bodyguardi

Mr. Wadesan: Yes.

Mr. Justice Wood: And that had been his previous employment

Mr. Wadeson: Yes, but he did other small things as well..

he had known the defendant for Exew Defendant For Two Years.

Cving evidence Mr. Harris anid over two years and bad been em- played by him from February When defendant dismissed him his 1927 to September the same year, belongings wore at 250, Des Voeux

tiff and Mr. M. K. Lo, of Meat at Tai Wong Street East Deacons, appeared for the plain Road Wost. Witness also had a Lo and Lo, for the defendant.

(Continued on next Column)

Mr. Jenkin remarked that witness had stated, as the two previous witnesses had done, that the plans had gone, and that nobody kaew where-Witness agreed.

Mr. Jenkin again put the query as to where bad all these papers come from 1

Witness: I don't know.

Mr. Jenkin äsked if witness,was file was now in front of him, with satisfied that the so-called lost the exception of the sketch plans.

Witness said that his recollection WAR that the original file was his own mind that the complete thicker, and he was not satisfied in file, as it previously existed, was in Court.

Always welcome!

WE ARE always glad to see you whenever you can find. time to drop in. Listen to the latest Victor Records, reproduced with marvelous fidelity on the Orthophonic Victrola. Hear the selec tions you like best, withour obligation. Come in

today!

and hat a few drinks. Defendant S. Moutrie & Co., Ltd.

He was ip company with a Bir. Blyth on December 1st when they met the defendant in Pedder Street. They all went to the Savoy Hotel

again and he replied that he would then asked witness to work for him if he was paid the same salary as before. Defendant agreed to this and gave witness 35 to bring his box up to Des Voeux Road West.

A General Assistant." Mr. Harris said his duties were those of a general assistant. He used to accompany the defendant was to go to the pictures and inter- about at night. Part of his duties

pret for the defendant, and then Inter continue to follow him about.

Harris said he was formerly co-, "Hot On The Rocks." Oross examined by Mr. Lo, Mr. ployed in Eddie's Cafe, Shanghai, Questioned with regard to the and then came down to Hong Kong. statement of claims, witness said Before the Shanghai employment that he had helped to make it out, he had been on West River boats and added that the information it and had also been employed on the struetions of Mr. S. B. Shaok. contained was given under the in-harbour works at Macao. These instructions were given ver bally when he was in the offices of ing to his memory. Mesars. Wilkinson and Grist, accord-

Mr. Jenkin suggested that witness had the missing file with him at this office, but witness denied this. Turner if he knew the dates, and Mr. Jenkin asked. Mr, Foster said he hoped witness would be very careful before making a statement.

Witness answered that he had made a mistake and that it was a

Mr. Jenkin: different document he referred to. with you ?-Witness: 1 cannot

Had you the file member.

get this information)-Witness: I Mr. Jenkia: Well, where did you had been shown numbers of letters in Messra, Wilkinson and Grist's office.

Mr. Jenkin suggested that witness ledke himself of all the details he had practically no personal-know- had mentioned, and that they had to be collected from documents.

Witness replied that he could not remember the dates, if that was what Mr. Jenkin meant. have to refer to some documents He would to get dates.

differ, and added that he could most Witness said that he begged to definitely assure Mr. Jenkin that the interview did take place.

defendant I put it to you that you Mr. Lo: When you first met the were absolutely on the rocks with nothing to do?-I was not of the

rocks.

I suggest that when you first met the defendant at the pier you had ne decent coat to wear, that you a boat in bad circumstances and told him you were the ex-skipper of that you borrowed a dollar or 80 from him.

Mr. Harris denied this.

Victor Distributors.

The New Orthophonic

Victrola

RUMOURED DISAPPEARANCE. MRS. CHIANG KAI SHEK.

SHANGHAI, Feb. Sad. Mrs. H. H. Kurg, sister of Mrs. Chiang Kai Shek, emphatically denied last night all reports that

effect was reported yesterday from peared. A strong rumour to that Mrs. Chang Kai Shek had disap-

Hankow. Mr. H. H. Kung returned from Nanking yesterday morning and had spent the week-end in Nanking with Mra, Chiang. He re- porte that the is well. Mr. T. V. Soong, Minister of Finance and a sent in Nanking. brother of Mrs. Chiang, is at pre-

During the Chinese New Year holidays, persistent rumours simi- lar to the one now coming from I put it to you that you met the Hankow were widely circulated in defendant frequently and from Shanghai Their authenticity was him that you had at last succeeded down to propaganda. When a re time to time got a few dollars from denied by members of Mrs. Chiang him until about July when you told Kai Sher's family who put them

He gave you $301-That is not rus, at that time sought some in finding a job and asked for 800,porter of the North-China Daily explanation of the rumours, he ac Defendant denied Mr. Lo's sug-cidentally arrived simultaneously Keation that he had never been, et- ployed by the defendant.

Personal Bodyguard. Voeux Road West, Mr. Harris Asked about the address in Des

ther questioned about his own said defendant lived there. Far duties, the plaintiff said the defen- dark with big sums of money in his dant was afraid to go home in the possession and he (Mr. Harris)! acted as his protector.

defendant was?-I thought he was Mr. Lo: What did you think the

a man of money.

But the motor boats-They did not interest me at all.

do with the motor boats? No, I Your duties then had nothing to had to follow him about at night.

If he employed you at all it was personal employment by him. Nothing to do with motor boats. but I was also his general assistant. Just a personal bodyguard-Yes, I put it to you that your case is a fabricated one and that you were never employed by him 7-That in

not true!

with a telegra from Mrs. Chiang. The present Hankow report can only be as echo of those which had N.G. Daily News. circulated earlier in Shanghai-

been re-engaged, but his recolles- tion was very hary of what was said afterwards.

A Charitable Act, Mr. W. Williams, an engineer, said he had known Mr. Harris for with him at Causeway Bay. Mr. the last fourteen months and lived

dant and left at 6.30 each evening Harris was employed by the deka- for West Point. In cross-examing- formerly employed by the Douglas tion by air. Lo, witness said he was Steamship Co., leaving them on September 18th. He had been e ployed there for nearly

усат.

Mr. Lo asked Mr. Williams if he (Mr. Lo) in the solicitor's office... remembered ever having seen him Witness said he did not remember seeing Mr. Lo at all.

Mr. Lo the naked it. Mr. Wil- liams remembered being given a dollar by him. Witness said he not remember, and suggested that Mr. Le had made a mistake as he (witness) had a good memory."

Mr. Lo also mentioned that he (Mr. Lo) had a good memory, far facca.

In reply to witness said he did not remember.

further questions, telling Mr. Lo that he had been to a central charitable institution and that they had done their best for him and that he could not go. back to them again.

Lost Plans And Letters.

"No Such Interview: Took Place." Witness was pressed on this point and then agreed that if the sketch Mr. Edwards was said to have acted The alleged interview, at which

defendant's signature they would be Mr. Jeskin, who suggested that no plans could be produced bearing the as interpreter, was mentioned by all right. He could not remember such interview ever took place. when the loss of the plans was first discovered. (It had been stated that the plans and certain corres- pondence relating to the negotia tions between the parties, and

An Important Witness, other, had been lost). All the dies, file contained letters and a folder witness said that he understood continued witness, were lost. One In further answer to questions, with plans at the back, this folder that a subpoena had been issued for probably containing the sketch Mr. Edwards attendance at Court. With regard to the installation plans, but he could not say for He had not seen him in Court that of meters, counsel ceferred to certain. The second file contained day. correspondence with the P.W.D. & roll of drawings..

His Lordship remarked, befoen Re-examined" by Mr. Wadeson, which showed that the P.W.D, Mr. Jenkin produced many letters, the Court adjourned, that he had plaintiff said he had instructed would not permit the installation in file form, and asked witness where taken down the alleged conversation Mr. Hall, the solicitor, to write of these meters in Kowloon houses they came from.

said to have taken place at this Mesere. Lo and Lo saying that he unless the houses were of a type;

interview, but he assumed that had been paid. Mr. Lo denica Counsel would follow the usual receiving the letter and copies were course and produce Mr. Edwards to handed in by Mr. Wadeson. confirm it.

Mr. Wadeson then put in a letter Mr. Alabaater explained that Mr. from Mr. Hall to the plaintiff Edwards was in Canton. He was which said that certain letters supposed to be coming back to Hong had been sent to Messis. Lo and Kong that evening, and in that case and that Mr. Hall would sup would be present in Court to give ply plaintiff with copies of them. evidence the following morning. (to

Mr. Lo rid he would inquire day). -. If he did not return it would about these letters.

In reply to his Lordship, Mr. Lo not be his (Mr. Alabaster's) fault. William Blyth, "a seaman, said said he had given the man a dollar His Lordabip commented that Mr. that on December 1st he went as an act of charity as the man Edwards was a most important wit with Harris to the Bavoy Hotel said he was hungry and wanted

where they had a talk with the de- food. Mr. Alabaster: I shall try and fendant over several drinks. The get here in the morning.

The latter spoke a few worde in His Lordship added that although | English to witness saying that Mr. he had taken notes regarding this Harris was going back. Witness interview, he would not be able to understood that to mean that Mr. allow it to go in as evidence if Mr. Harris had been re-engaged. Edwards did not come to give con- In reply to Mr."Lo, witness azid firmatory evidence regarding the he was certain that defendant said interview and the alleged conversa he had re-engaged plaintiff All tion. His Lordship added that the conversation between plaintiff Witness replied that it had prob he saw the difficulty that Counsel and defendant was carried out in Bavoy Hotel and for Mr. Loto' were in if they could not produce Chinese. He admitted they had investigate the matter of the miss this important wither,

several drinks after he was told The case was then adjourned untilby defendant that plaintiff had the case was accordingly ad

ing lettere this morning.

{ (Continued on next Column.)journed until this afternoon at 3.30.

After requirements regarding the definition of boundaries had been complied with plaintiff. proceeded with the drawings and, after wait ing for several weeks for the de- fendant to put in an appearance at plaintiff's office, plaintiff wr te & letter to him in December, 1924, stating that the plans were ready for submission to the F.W.D.

Mr. Jenkin suggested that the file could not have contained many more letters than the one he produced.

Witnem replied that the fire was a very thick one.

Mr. Jenkin further suggested that the correspondence in Court, would make up practically the whole of the fie, with the exception of the sketch plans.

L

A Complete File? Defendant Cooling On?

Witness agreed that it would Defendant called at the plain appear to be a complete file. He tiff's office early in the New Year. also agreed there was a folder on By this time, stated counsel, the the back which might be similar to building boom was not so strong the ons containing the plans, which and the defendant apparently was he had referred to as lost. not quite so sure that he might not Mr. Jenkin asked. if the whole file change his mind. At any rate, he had been lost where had all this requested plaintif not to send the correspondence came from 7. plans at that time to the Building Authority but to wait a fortnight. | Ho_also_iked_for_the_fees to be

reduced.

ably been rediscovered by the solicitors

(Ventisudd_on_next_ Osluma,)

neas,

Dass adjourned. Answering further questions wit said that since he had been employed Mr. Harris had been supporting him.

His Lordship suggested that the case should be adjourned in order. that Mr. Wadeson could go into the matter of the receipt said to bare been handed over in the