1891-03-21 — Page 2

Intimations.

DAKIN BROS. OF CHINA, LIMITED, DISPENSING CHEMISTS, &c.

PURE WINES.

WE beg to lovite careful attention to the

following selection from our Wine List, for we bave succeeded in combining purity and excellence of quality with moderate prices.

SHERRY,

per cati, parbatėle. Vino Genereso a generous

round wing, green seal ........$ 6.00 $6.50 Vino Depasio a medium dry. wine with delicate flavour, rid seni

THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH, SATURDAY, MARCH 21, 1891.

The Honghong Teleguaph.

HONGKONG, Saturday, MaxRCH 31, 1891,

TELEGRAMS

TERRIBLE DISASTER AT SEA.

LONDON, March 19th.

The ateamar Utopia sank fre minutes after [{ being in collision with the ironclad Rodney naar Gibraltar. Five hundred and seventy-six Italian ( emigrants were lost.

LOCAL AND GENERAL.

IN 1890 there were 2,300 imprisonments for drunkenness and 191 for selling liquor in the tentotal state of Maine. Hurros 1.

$10.00

$1.00

Amontillado a high class

natural wine for connois- seurs of Sherry, yellow stał.$12.00. $1.10 Delicioso-the very finest

-- sherry procurable," 6 years

in bottia N

$14.00

$1.25

PORT. Superior quality...........................$19.00 Invalid Port, gold sach mim$12.00 Old Taway, soft and mature,

$1.00 $1.10

Wx understand that the usual Concert, tendered

black seal.........$14.00 Specially selected old vintage. $10,00

BURGUNDY.

$1.35

by the members of the Hongkong Musical Club

$1.75

Beaune-a full-bodied Red

Burgundy with strengthen-

$1.39

ly there are no marriages 'in heaven. It follows,

of course, there can be no divorces there. Other

$1.25

$1.75

lug properties.....................................$14.00

Chablis mellow White

Burgundy, fine flavour and

bouquet ...

$14.00

Well

CHAMPAGNE.

specially selected dry wine..$18.00,

Avizea

matured,

Lemoine Vin-brut Cuvee

Royale. As Supplied regu-

Пlarly to the Prince of Wales,

House of Commera, and the

chief clubs in London, &........$12.00 $1.00 Per case of 24 pints

$13.00 $1.00

We are sole Agents in China for the Sale of

this splendid Wine.

(Telephone No. 60.)

Nos. 22 & 14, QUEEN'S ROAD CENTRAL.

Hongkong, 9th March, 159).

‚BY AFPOINTMENT.

WINES AND SPIRITS.

[37

FOR selling the 'fragrant " drug without a'permit | plaintiff through. Mr. Webber two suma, aze from the Oplum Farmer a Celestial chaƒ de of $300 and one of $500, and, he had been | Informed by Mr. Webber, when he made the cuifine was mint into retirement for 21 days by last payment, that he (Webber) had added | order of the magistrate st ti e f general clearance! another $100 to it when he handed it over to

this morning.

Minhinnett, He had over and over again made application to Minhinnett to reader him an ac count of what he was personally liable for and he would settle, but Minbingstt had never done so. It We was only when Webber had left the colony that this acilon was commenced. Even when he reçoived a letter from plaintiff's solicitors he had written asking for an account to be sent klu but it was incorrect. The $800 paid was not and he would pay it. An account was sent him credited to him at all.

A Scorch contemporary is responsible for the following:-"Mr.Gladstone's penchant for getting a peep behind the scones when he goes to the theatre nearly led to an awkward contretemps tha sthar avealag. He was at the Lyceums, and, | after the first act, mysteriously disappeared. It was surmised he bad gone to the House of Commons, but a rapid change of scene discovered the grand old political tragediam having a chat with Mr. Irving in the wings. He was promptly palled aalde, and the majority had no idea that the disappearing costitails belonged to un ex- Prime Minister, whose stage in this mighty, Empire."

SUPREME COURT."

IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION,

|

|

Mr. Francis-That amount went to the credit of interest that was overdue, There was never anything paid on account of principal.

Mr. Fraser-Smith-The statement made by the learned counsel is an absolute falsehood.

His lordship-I don't think that is a proper expression to use with reference to the learned

counsel.

Mr. Francis-Do not interrupt him, my lord; please let him go on. He is only dyeing him self deeper and deeper in lies.

to their friends, will take place on Thursday the (Bifora Sir Jamis Ruriali, Chief Justice, defendant was then called: 9th April,

and a Special Fury.)

March 20th.

reasons may account for no divorces. Perhaps| A CLAIM OF $1,300 ON A PROMISSORY NOT

there are no lawyers in heaven 1

A New York policeman has a moustache— perhaps it would be better in his case to say a pair of monstaches-measuring twenty-six inches from tip to tip. The genial Wicking (sn't in ft.

I

THE meeting of shareholders, in the Balmoral Gold Mining Company, which was advertised for the 25th inst., has been altered to Thursday, the 25th ewing to the former date being a | share settlement day.

An Emergency Convocation of Cathay Chapter, No. 1165, will be held in Freemasons' Hall, Zetland Street, on Thursday, the 25th instast, at 8.30 for 9 p.m. precisely. Visiting companions are cordially invited.

ST. PETER'S SKAMEN'S CHURCH.-The Minien

A. S. WATSON & CO., LD.steam-launch Day Spring will call alongside

ESTABLISHED AD, 1841, ".

MANUFACTURERS OF AERATED WATERS.

اور

Our New Factory has been ratently refitted with automatic Steam Machinery of the latest and most approved kind, and we are well able to_compaté in quality with the bist English Makers, The purest ingredients only are weed, and the utmost care and cleanliness ars exercised in the manufacture throughout, LARGE BOMBAY

"SODAS”

We continue to supply large bottles as keretofore, fres of Exira Chargs, to thess of our Customers who prefer to have them to the ordinary sise.

COAST PORT ORDERS, whenever practicable, are despatched by first steamer leaving after receipt of order,

FOR COAST PORTS, Waters are packed and placed on board ship at Hongkong prices, and the full amount allowed for Packages and Empties when received in good order.

Counterfoil Order Books supplied on applica

Hon.

Our Registered Telegraphic Address !s, "DISPENSARY, HONGKONG" And all signed messages addressed thes will receive prompt attention.

The following is a List of Waters always

kept ready in Stock:- PURE AERATED WATERS

SODA WATER 1 LEMONADE

POTASH WATER

SELTZER WATER

SARSAPARILLA WATER

LITHIA WATER

vessels hoisting code pennant C between 9 and 10.30 am, on Sunday to convey men n shore to the 11 o'clock service, returning aboùl 12.39.

}

Mr. Fraser-Smith-I apologise to the Court for using an improper expression-not to the Icarned counsel,

The following evidence on behalf of the Leung Ayon examined by the defendant, sald -I am a shipchaudier. I have been in Hong kong for over twenty years. In June last 1 entered into business relations with Mr. Webber, There was a partnership talked about between us, but nothing was ever settled. I met you in the Shameen Hotel at Canton In August last. Mr. Wilktason was present, I had borrowed $1,900 from Mr. Minhinnett in July last year, on the security of an insurance policy. I did not pay Mr. Minblanelt $700 on account of Mr. Webber. 1 paid $700 to Mr. Wotton on Webber's account.

At the Juncture the witness began to give his evidence fo a very hesitating manner, and it was The jurors were:-Mesme. E. Burnle, T.not until hard pressed by his lordship that he Howard, 5. W. Coxon, H. Crawford, E. H could be induced to give a decided answer. Meibye, A. O'D Gourdin and N. P. Dhalla.

This was a suit brought by John Minhinnett, foreman in the Public Works Department, to recover $1,300, balance alleged to be due on

■ Joint promissory note for $6,500, from Mr. Robert Fraser-Smith.

Mr. Francis, QC, instructed by Messrs. Dadant appeared in person.

Mossap, was for the plaintiff; the

and

Mt. Francis said this was an action for a joint and several promissory note signed by Robert Fraser-Smith and John Francis Webber. Mr. Fraser-Smith was alone sued in this action The petition set out that on the 8th December, 1888, Robert Truser-Smith, Editor and proprietor of the Hongkong Telegraph, and John Francis Webber, a solicitor of the colony, signed joint to Joba Minhinnett, an overseer of works, five

note by which they undertook to months after date, the sum of $6,500 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent. per annum. Mr. Webber had never paid anythleg on this acte, either as principal or interest. The defendant $300, and some three months ago had paid, on had paid two sums, one of $500 and one of judgment being entered against him, the sum of $5,674, leaving a balance of $1,300 due, with interest from the date of issue of the writ, In his answer the defendant admitted algning the colmary pate, but stated that there was a agreement made at the time, by which was answerable for $5,000 and Mr. Webber for $1,500. He further stated that he had paid $500 and $300, for which he held receipts, and the amount mentioned in the petition on judgment against him. He further stated that Mr. Webber had paid the plaintiff a sum of $600 and that Leung Ayon bad paid plaintif on behalf of Mr. Webber a sum of $700, and that nothing further CHOLERA continues to make its presence felt remained due to plaintif. Under the preylstons proof was thrown on the defendant, he must | deaths being roughly estimated at 40 per day,

begin

He (Mr. Francis) had stated the The Stam Gourits thinks that with very little pleadings, and the burden of proof was on the trouble the authorities would be able to furnish,defendent to show, after admitting signing the note, that the sums mentioned in his answer accurate figures, but this they do not attempt to

had been paid. do. With the exception of a few sailors, no Euro- Peans have been attacked this season.

INSPECTOR MACKIE and a 'couple of Centre Street "toughs" had a lengthy argument before Mr. Wise this morning, The upshot was that the magistrate considered it pioven, that the two defendants were keepers of a paikan gambling

den, and sent them aloft for two months,

Witness (continuing) said:-1 may have told you and my solicitor that I had paid $70 on behalf of Mr. Webber. That was not correct never paid any you to Mr. Minhinneti on behalf of this promissory note. I never told you so when I met you la the Shameen Hotel. I have paid Webber money. I gave him altogether $1,200 I have a receipt for it. I do not know No. 3, Arsenal Street

Tune

answer witness said: I went there on the zith After thought and under pressure for a distinct of last year with a friend, Mr. Van Epps. It was to borrow money from Minhinnett for a friend.

Charles David Wilkinson-I am a solicitor August last. practising in Hongkong. I was in Canton In I was present when you had a con. versation with Leung Ayon in the Shameen Hotel.

His lordship-How can that be evidence? Suppose Leung Ayon did say he had paid he now desies it I will allow you to proceed if it is not objected to, but I shall have to direct the Jury that this is no evidence as to payment.

Witness continuing-Leung Ayon said that he had paid $700 to Mr. Minhinoett for Webber on account of a promissory note. You asked Leung Ayen if he had paid anything to Mr. Minhinnett on the promissory note and he said that he had paid $700. I also sent this letter (letter put fo and read) to Mr. Rodyk in which I refer to yoo pald by Ah You to Minhinnett on a pro-

note.

In the Chinese Customs, enclosing $35 to send to Webber. You showed me this before wa had about the re-transfer with Trang Klag of the declared war against each other.

arranged the promissory note by paying the money for it. By the Court-When the fortnight was up and the money was not paid into the O. B. C. I got the money from Chines bank and transferred the note to Tsang King. Afterwards I paid him the money and got the note re-transferred.

By the defendant-I received $ao interest from you, but I was acting as go-between for Thang King. I had to pay $65 a month I did get $300 from you through Webber Interest to the Chinese bank for the_money,

but not on the date of the receipt handed to me, 11th May 1889, and I also afterwards received $5oo from you making $800 in all. I also received $5.140 and $529 through the Court, making to all 36,464,35. never received anything from Webber on account of this note except the $800 mentioned. I did not receive $100 on the 1st February from Webber, 1 see the cheque handed to me which is one for $100 from Webber. I remember now that I did receive that sum from him, wat I don't know what it was for. I cannot say whether I received any money from Webber on the 8th March, 1889. The $100 received on the 1st February bad nothing to do with the $6.5no; it was on another note for $1,000, which I held I might have received other sums at Ister dates but cannot state positively for the reson that I keep me books at all-merely Jat things down on bits of paper. 1 calculate interest on loans by writing it off on the back of the debit nots.

to

At this juncture Mr. Fraser-Smith desired. Webber, as collateral proof of payment of

put in evidence the diaries of Mr. J. F. certain rams on account at certain dates, but Mr. Francis objected and his lordship upheld the objection,

After some farther examination, during which the defendant was frequently Interrupted, both by the judge and the counsel for the plaintiff, which resulted in several meat "passages of words, the examination-in-chief of Minhinneti concluded.

pay it late Court, Jadgilent was entered agilost me on the 25th August and I gave my solicitor a reference to the balance of interest and I had to cheque for the money. The next matter was in pay a further $594. Leong Ayon afterwards came to my office and told me he had pald Minhinnett money on behalf of Webber on this account afterwards saw him in Canton in the presence of his solicitar, Mr. Wilkinson, and he distinctly stated that he had paid $700 on behalf of Webber an account of this promissory note. If this matter could have stood over for three weeks, I have every reason believe that Mr. Webber would be here, and I should have been able to prove. conclusively that the money was paid to Mishianett on behalf of this note. It was only because I was sick and unable to make the proper applications to your lordship or feel certain the case would have been postponed.

Cross-examined by Mr. Francis-I do not think I sent any answer to Messrs. Dennys and Mossop to their letter enclosing the account. I asked them to state the amount I owed on the $5,000. If I did not write to Mr. Mossop telling him I was ready to pay what I owed, I certainly told him so. I had the money to pay three times over, I did not have to borrow the $5,000 from Mr. Chater and I consider the suggestion grossly impertinent. 1 got it through the Chartered Bank. Very probably had to overdraw my account to pay it.

By the Court-It is absolutely untrue that Minhinnett ever saw me and offered to share tha loss on Webber's $1,500,

This concluded the evidence for the defence. Mr. Francis called no evidence on behalf of the plaintif

called

Mr. Fraser-Smith, in addressing the Jury, sald claimed bad already been paid by or on behalfof the delance was simply that the amogut Webber. He himself had paid two separate rums of $100 and $500 and it was in evidence that on the 30th September 2600 was paid by Webber on account of this promissory note, Minhinneit had stated that this $600 was paid on account of somthing different altogether, that it was paid on another transaction "with Wabber. In his affidavits, which were made on the hearing of the case in Chambers, Minhinnett distinctly repudiated the suggestion that Webber had paid him anything on this or on any other account. There was another promissory note of Webber's and on the strength of that Minhinnett made his application to have Webber adjudicated a bank- rupt. He (chedefendant) maintained that the $60 paid by Webber on Sept. aoth was paid on account of the promissory note of $6,500. He thought extremely hard lines that he (Mr. Fraser-Smith), the jury would agree with him that it was especially under the circumstances, should be upon to pay this $1,100. They had heard the evidence of Ab Yen, and would estimate it at its proper value. The only real witness in the case was Mr. Minhinnett, and he (the defendant) called him himself. He, (the would never have been called had not be

defendant) had never seen him before this transaction, had only seen him a few times in connection with it, and yet this man actually had the impudence to speak of him as "Smith" The whole ofthe statements with regard to this case made by Minhinnett in the box were a tissus of lies, deliberata lies. He had only seen Minhinnett four times in his own office and twice or thres limes in Mr. Webber's, and notwithstanding what had been said and done since in connection with this man, of which the whole colony was Sware, be scarcely know anything of him now, with was this, was he (the defendant) But apart from this the real question to deal Hable for this money? He asked the jury

Minkinsett had said that he had never received plaintiff by Webber on behalf of this note, any money from Webber, yet when he put a cheque of Webber's received by bim into his Broo, and said that he had forgotten it. Hers bands he admitted he had received the amount, was a man, who admitted that he had lareo money transactions, yet, could produce no books books and could produce nothing. The case, or accounts at all. He stated that he kept no resolved itself into a simple question of facts and made by Minhinnett or those made by himself. whether the jury would believe the statements In his supreme legal ignorance he bad thought that there were circumstances which he could arge by which it might have been that the promissory note could not have been held as bluding His lordship, and doubtless he was right, held that these points could not be submitted. As a matter of equity, he felt certain that any seven commercial men t cial relations between Webber and Minhinnett, the colony, considering the fatimante and finan and considering the fact that he (the defendant) had over and over again asked for a settlement, would feel perfectly justified in setting aside this promissory note. He left the decision in the hands of the jury feeling assured that they would

among the native population at Bangkok, the of the code, section 62, where the burden of the Francis valid that the $700 had nothing to / of the joint note. I have had one other transac to find that this 4600 was pid to the

IT is, of course, almost unnecessary, to remind our readers of the first performance of the Miin Dramatic Company, who make their first appear ance in Hongkong te-night in "Hamlet," The house will be a crowded one, and as the curtain will rise promptly at 9 p.m. it would be well if | the public would oblige by "coming to an

aucker" punctually at the hour mentioned.

Two night-prowlers were fallen, upon heavily last night on the Shau-kliwan Road by P.C. 97, who after a rather exciting chase ran the prisoners to earth in a quarry. Upon inspection he discovered that they were armed with revolvers and daggets which were taken from them while a Sikh constable covered them with his Winchester repeater. $15 or six weeks hard" was the magisterial award.

||

Mr. Fraser-Smith said he was being sued for a sum of money which he did not acknowledge wing and it was for the plaintiff to prove his indebtedness. When the learned counsel took upon himself to predict that the defence was limited to one of payment of the debt be avershot the mark It would be quite time enough for him to prophecy what the defence was when he had heard it.

proof was on the defendant. It was for him

His lordably said he thought the burden of

to prove that these amounts had been paid.

Kir. Fraser-Smith-I don't think your lordship quite appreciates the eltuation.

His lordship-Don't be Impertinent! Mr. Fraser-Smith-I did not intend to be, my lard."

His lordship-preside here, and 1 thoroughly appreciate the position. You say this $1,350 has been paid and it is for you to prove it.

Mr. Fraser-Smith Certainly, my lord, If that is your lordship's ruling. I only wish to dissbuss your mind of the idea that I latended to be impertineat. I think your lordship entirely misconstrued my remaric

Mr.

do with the note for $6,500. There was a note for $700 signed by Mr. Webber and Leung Ayon, which he had still in his possession.

John Minhinnett (called and examined by Mr. Frater-Smith) said Mr. Webber did not act as my agent for a considerable time. He bas done some slight business for me as a solicitor. Mr. Webber did not lend $5,000 to you on my account. I lent it to you. I may have stated here on the roth November that I lent you $1,000 and Mr. Webber $1,502. I think I said then that I did not pay you the money, but that I presumed Mr. Webber did. Mr. Webber acted as

my solicitar in the matter.

¡

Cross-examined by Mr. Francis-In the Grst instance the defendant and Webber gpt the money from the Bank. I gave security to the Bank and Webber drew the money, den' know how it was drawn. I only know it was not repaid, and I had to make it good. I got $6,500 from the Chinese bank and gave it to Mr. Webber and went with him to the O.B.C.and saw the O. F. C. I SAW both Mr. Webber and Mr. it paid in. In negotiating for this money from Fraser-Smith, The joint promissory note was not signed by Mr. Fraser-Smith in my presence. At the time they got the money they did not tell me how the money was divided. They told me afterwards. I never ver any money on account of this note. From Mr. received from Mr. Fraser-Smith's own hand

Webber I received $300 and $500. I received the $300 on the 9th July, 1889. There was then over, six months' interest due. On or about the 15th January, 189, I received the $500; I got it from Mr. Webber's clerk, Mr. Van Eps. There was then much more than that nmount dua' an interest. I received no other amounts from Mr. Webber on the account. On the 30th August, 1889, 1 lent Mr. Webber food, and he paid it back on the 20th Sept. At the time ne owed me another $1,500 on another account. I am quite sure that the $600 paid on Sept. 20th $6,500, I never agreed to divide the amount of was for the loan and had nothing to do with the the promissory note and take two notes instead tion with Mr. Fraser-Smith besides this one, Between the giving ofthe promissory note and the commencement of the acilon I saw Mr. Fraser Smith at ble office dozens of times, I never On the 13th June, 1800, Ilent Webber and Ayen received $700 from Ayon on account of this note. $700. It has never been repaid. I leat Ayon $1,900 on an insurance policy. There is no truth in the statement that I kept back $700 out of that sum la payment of this note. Ayon had nothing to do with this transaction of $5,500,

Mr. Fraser-Smith, the defendant, then wont into the witness box. He said-On the 8th December, 1888, I signed a promissory note in To the Court-The money was lent in this Mr. Webber's office. I had received the sum of way, I became security in November 1818 to $5,000 same ten days previously from Mr. the O.. B. C. for $6,500 on behalf of Mr. Fraser-Webber. At the time I received the cheque 1 Smith and Mr. Webber for a fortnight. Mr. Fraser did not know who was leading the money. On Smith said it would only be for a day or two, a the 8th December I went to Mr. Webber's office fortnight at the furthest. When the fortnight I saw Minhinnett there and was informed that was up the money had not been paid into the ho was the lender. Mr. Webber asked me, in Bank, and the manager wrote to me saying the his presence, if I would, as he wanted moOGY, money had to be paid. I went to Mr. Fraser sign a joint promissory note for $6,500, Ingreed Smith's office; he said he had been disappointed to do so. At the same time, the note which has and talked to the "olly" way he does and pro- been produced stating that $5,000 was for the posed that I might try if I could get it from a Chinese Bank. I went to Mt. Webber and he

and $1,500 for Webbar, was aigued in Minhia- said he had no money,

nett's presence, and the joint promissory note was likewise signed in his presence. I had had previously one transaction with Minhinnett Mr. Francis said he had but a few words to Just and equitable view of the whole case. through Mr. Webber. On the rgth November, 1888, I had borrowed $2,500 for a friend of mine,ay to the jury and very lule with regard to of this matter of 86,500 until I heard, from Mr. joint promissory note signed by the defendant and hold receipts for the payment. Iheard nothing what had just been said. The claim was on Webber on the 11th May, 1888, saying that and Webber. This note, in point of law, madecach, Mr. Fraser-Smith said he quite understood

Mr. Francis He wasn't dying, was he?

Minklunett wanted something on account of the two defendants equally liable for the entire that. He was only sorry that his lordship should

seat him a cheque for $300. On the 20th mm borrowed. Mr. Fraser-Smith in his opening Mr. France-Smith-I am sorry to have to September I had another mate from Webber address told them them the circumstances under Imagine for moment that he intended to be make a complaint, my lord, of rudeness on the asking me if I could pay $500 on accoust of the which this money was borrowed, and if they had impertinent. Addressing the jury, defendant said part of the learned counsel, Mr. Minhinnett Ioan. I sent the gooat ance, and Mr. Wibber paid attention only to bis opening address they position he had been placed by the ruling of the said "He wasn't dying, was he

Minhinnett $100 more, The next His lordskip-On never mind let's get on

in want of $10,000, not $3,000, or $6,500. Ha thing I bened was on the 20th Jan., 1890, when Webber wrote and told them that in consequence of some his simplicity he had thought that when one with the

caso.

Mr. Fraser-Smith (to Mr. person was suing another for a sum of money in Francia)-I'll settle with you my own way.

me that Minhinnett was pressing him for money actions with certain Chinese falling through a court of Justice, it was for that person to come

and he wanted me to lend him $500 to pay him he was left liable for the purchase of certats forward and prove his case, However, the onus document signed by you and Webber, in which money, and the same afternoon Webber came to

Examination continued I never saw the something on account, I did not lend him the unboats, and Mr. Minhinnett corroborated had been, thrown on him and he would shortly you state how the money, was divided. I had me and told me that he had got the money amount for the purpose

this in stating that he went security for this relate the circumstances of the transaction. Is ao correspondence with you prior to the signing and had paid Minhinnett continually of certain gunboats Webber and Fraser of the purchase November, 1888, there was a case tried in that of the promissory note. I have written to you pressing Mr. Webber to settle this matter. Staith, he believed, through Webber's account Court which was commonly known as the "Bale and applied to you personally for this money Mr. Minhinnett was only in my office four times, wished to overdraw to the extent of Comer cases his lordship presided and Mr. before Mr. Webber left the colony. I got a letter twice with Mr. Wabber and twice alone. Isaw 66,500 and Minhinnett undertook to be respon Francis appeared for his (Mr, Fraser-Smith's) from you on the 14th March, 1890, making me to him four times at Mr. Webber's, twice at his sible for this overdraft. How much of this sum friends He was acting for certain Chiassa call at your office and arrange matters on the office, once after tiffin and once at dinner, Beyond went to Mr. Fraser Smith and how much to Mir concerned in that case, and had entered into following Sunday. I went to your office but I that I had never seen him. The 12th March Webber did not matterone way or the other. Mr. amogements on their behalf for the purchass do not think it was arranged. I did not take any 1890 was the next I heard about the matter, Fraser-Smith might be perfectly correct, when of two gunboats in Canton. Disputes arose further action till May. I had no reason for not amongst the Chinese, the case came late Court, going on with the action till that time. Surely bar and Mr. Minhinnett called, en matabe the remaining $1,500 went to Mr. Webber, but wrote a letter on the 14th March and Mr. Web ho stated that he only received $5,000 and that and the parties for whom he was acting lost the I could choose my own time? I received a letter matter was left, in abeyance Webber and Mr. Minhinnett had positively sworn that he knew case. They were unable to carry out the from you on the 10th May in which you ask for contract that he had entered into on their behalf as explanation of the letter from Denny's and

Minhinnett were on the most idendly Serms and it nothing of this at the time the money was lent be was left responsible.

was agreed to let the matter sland over. In X and the he knew nothing of the document to Some $10,000 Messop, after the arrangement with me, That received the letter from Dennys and Mossop, that effect, which had put in. He was only was required for the purchase of these does not suggest to me that any arrangement looked on the matter as a joke, after the strange told subsequently of this ar sugement, When gunboats and Mr. Webber, who acted in had been made. On the roth June I received ment made, I had desene, of times anked to the demanded repayment of his money Mr.

the matter settled.

Fraser-Smith endeavoured to get out of bis llable ranched nù regarding the erratic and nacertain December, 1988, defendant learned that the settlement of your personal latily. I

$5.000. Mr, Wabber did so, and on the 8th Sunday and make some arrangement for the

may the

down as a creditor for $5,000, leaving the re delivery of the Hongkong Triingraph, and no leader was Mr. Minhinnett, of the Public Works

Witness--Yes, I did. ' doubt most of thems are well founded. Owing Department, When, he went to dig the mare calid on the following Sunday. I went se

sponsibility of the other $7,500 with Webber. It I remember particular His lordshly Did you ever tender the chequer was proved that after Miahlanett going security to various unavoidable circumstances the apparently in a fourishing state of business, arranged. The only thing I wanted was for you Well, the legal proceedings threatened foli ber had falled to pay it and Mr. Minhinnett promissory note, Mr. Webber, who was times. I do not know that anything was Witness No, my lord, but I had it ready for the money Mr. Fraser-Smith and Mr. Webe of publication has for some time past been much aid he wanted accommodation for a short and Webber to settle up amicably, if possible, I through. On the 19th Jane, Mr. Minhinnett was called upon to make it good. After some later than usual, and the distribution system is time and asked him if he objected to did not want to force you and Webber into the learned that Mr. Webber was is what gener- difficulty be got the money from Chinesa also in many respecie unsatisfactory. We shall diguing a joint note for $6,500 of which he Court.

ally known as "Queer Stract." On the Sunday back through rang- do our best to amend these defects, and hope (Webber) was to have $1,500. He consented and

Mr. Fraser-Smith-Bat your policy changed preceding the 19th ice. That was the

g-King. The whole trans- Mr. Webber and Mr. acilon as described by. Mr. Minhinnett was from Monday next to regularly publish the signed the note, but to make sure that there should after Webber left the Colony.

Minhinnett called at

a very simple, and natural one. Now on the be no mistake, in the presence of the plaintif Telegraph, special occasions always excupied, a document was drawn up and signed by Mr. change. I called on you about a fortnight after him in the Court. On the 19th June: I wrote to both parties soverally were responsible for the Witness—Yes; I can give the reason for that last time I ever saw Mr. Minhlonett till I saw promissory note there could be no doubt that between 5.30 and 6 o'clock every resing, so Webber and himself stating that $5,000 Webber left the colony, and I asked you what him asking im to see me on the following whole amount. Supposing that Minhinnett was Messrs. Kelly & Walsh, Limited, that subscribers should always recolve their was to be leat to him, and the other $1,500 to you were going to do in the matter. You said it | Sunday and that arrangements would be made; Peach party, had received, he hit all insisted on

aware of this document declaring hor

declaring hon, much copies before the dinser hour. Those who live Mr. Wabber.

was very hard lines on you to have to pay this That was my last communication, with him on at the Peak can always obtain their papers by being sued is the joint. promissory note, "We will divide the difference; you lose $750 | Meszyn. Dennys and Mom, wka” a. note from folat and several note; and whether he was

His lordship The lastrument upon which money, meaning the $1,500 Webber got. I said the matter. The next thing which the plaintiff holds as security.

cognisant or not of the existence of the other and I'll lose $750" and you said, སཾ No, not proceedings I wrote back; asking for an document he had a perfect right to hold either

and Mossop, threatening Mr. Fraser-Smith said he submitted that cash you can go to Court and get it." account of what was dite from me to be sent gentleman who had signed the note liable have any reasons for compisining as to late there were circumstances under which even I said Very well, then we shall have to fight." and the amount would be duly paid. An for the whole amount. By signing the note Mr. delivery, will peseptly address "The Manager, mar note might be set aside. You said "Yes, and I'll make it hot for you. I account with test to me which was incorrect. Fraser-Smith and Wabber and made themselves

He submitted that he ought to be allowed uld "Very well, we'll see about that," and í when the difficulty will be at once inquired inte | to make the existence of this agreement left. I ransomber the occasion because you Mr. Junior Tinding: Clarks lo, Chambers. I whatever which would support any point of equity Awit was then landed and the matter came before each and individually liable. Thers was nothing and removed,

known to the Jury," Ha: kad paid to the i showed me a letter you had received Dem a man | Kimitted al enso ewing $1/143 has erdeh je ide visbie Mis: Travis ända to poo out, al die

TONIC WATER

GINGER ALE

GINGERADE

No Credit given for bottles that look dirty, or greasy, or that appear to have been used for any other purpose than that of Containing Aersted Water, as such bottles are never used

again by us,

A. S. WATSON & Co., LIMITED, Hongkong, China, and Manila,

[s

*

"N. R." has sent us what is described as an original ode "Te Georgina" which winds up

thusly:-

*This legend now I find le triin, As true as there are tides 1

For I, yes I, have found these wala T Yes, found them in your eyes.”

His lordship The only construction I could put on it was you intended to convey that it was for you and act me to decide as to the procedure. Your defence is that the money was paid and the

on you to prove it.

Dana in

By the defendant-I met you on several occa slons before you signed the note, I saw you in your office with Webber a fortnight before he left the Colony and you asked me to divide the pote. I refused to do so. I did not see you sign the promissory note. Webber took it up to you you were sick or something.

NOW READY. English of a remarkable discovery, but it is Court, which was no doubt perfectly correct. Ia

This is something--a relation in very sheż, he had been taken somewhat unawares in the ld I was sick and Mr. Francis' insultingly returned the receipt and stated that he had paid might have come to the conclusion that he was

[PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY,]

*THE HONGKONG · DIRECTORY AND HONG LIST FOR THE FAR EAST" FOR 1891.

not poetry.

Taxre will be a game of football, under Asso ciation rules, at Happy Valley, on Monday after noon at 4.30 p.m. The match is to be the Club versus the Royal Engineers. The following | members will represent the Club.

Forwards.

Centre Eance. backs. Hallward, H. C. Marshall,

Full backs.

Lift.

THIS Valuable Work, with many NEW Slade & Dundas.

ADDITIONS and IMPROVEMENTS,

IS NOW READY.

PRICE THREE DOLLARS.

Orders for Coples of THE "HONGKONG

Right, Dow & Lewis,

F. Maltland.

A. Sharp, W. H. Wallace.

sal hesper. W. Anderson;

and

DIRECTORY" may be sent to the follow To SUBSCRIBERA.—Many complalnız hava lately the case as solicitor, agreed to arrange a loan for letter icom you asking me to calfon the following | havracis–Did you Ter offer to put down |·lity for the suhete and to induce him to put hiat

Agenti

HONGKONG...Mr. W. Brewer.

...Messrs. F. Blackhead & Co. ...Messrs. Heuermann, Herbst & Ca. Messrs. Kolly & Walsh, Limited. ...Messrs. Lane, Crawford & Co. ...The Hongkong Trading Co., Ltd. ...Man Yu Tong, Hollywood Road. MACÃO.........Messrs. A. As de Mello & Co. Astov andl

· Mr. N. Moalle, FORMOSA... Foochow ...Mr. H. W. Churchill SHANGKAI

Messrs. Kelly & Walsh, Limited,|

& NORTH- Shanghai,

IRN PORTS

JAPAN ..... Yokohama.

BANGKOK...Rev. S. J. Smith,

BEIGAPORE...Messrs. Sayis & Co., Limited.

PARIS and Meurs, Amédée Prince & Co. LONDON...

or to

"THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH * OFFICE,

Pedder's Hill,

Hongkong, January 19th, 1893

sending to the Peak Hotel every evening. We shali estcom is a great favor li subscribers who

YOU

pool

Jega