1909-06-09 — Page 4

Entimation.

LIMITED.

́ESTABLISHED A.D. 1841.

CHEMISTS

BY APPOINTMENT TO HIS EXCELLENCY THE

Governor and Household,

Watson's HYGIENOL,

THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH WEDNESDAY

to join in such a contract, but the case was otherwise with miners, for if they were to adopt the suggestion, they would not be able to secure in adequate labour force. This might almost be cited as the case of men "obsessed by financial considerations."

Divorce Damages.

MOTION DISMISSED.

1NTERESTING DECISION IN THE MITCHELL

LEMM ACTION,

The action which was brought by Captain C. W. Mitchell, of the steamer Fook Sang, against John Lamm, the Hongkong architect, for damages for the alleged misconduct with his wife, at Kowloon, some time age, has bean concluded.

JUNE 9 1909.

WESE RIVER:FLOODS.

MANY DISTRICTS AFFEGITD.

[From Our Own Correspondent.)

Cadion, 8th Junn Urgout telegums have been received at Cap- on from various districte along the West River, reporting the visitation of disastrous floods for the second time this year. The districts flooded are the Tak Hing, Tsong Ng, Suo Bing, Tung On, and the city of the Shinblog prefecture, where the embankments have given way in several places. The present floods have gained nearly the same height as that of last your The town of Faishan has also been badly flooded since the 6th instant, and two men have been drowned,

RELIEF.

|tha Isle of Man, the limiting period being defendant petitioned for revocation of the here three years, this, question was thun an. - pate dt??". It is first to be noted that theis was swered :—"! The plna shows only that the Manx | no rea judicats here, for the right, gave rise to Court has decided that the debt is barred in three | two different equities.” Au'order for revocation years; that cannot be an answer to the action in of the patent was made. The Court of Appeal England" But if the judgment in the foreign bold savertheless that the original plaintiff was Court has been, not that the debt in barred by entitled under his judgment to substantial limitation, but that a right has bean acquired damages, and that the defendant was stopped by prescription, then the matter is res judicata on the inquiry from alleging that the for the question of right, that is the merits of patent bad since been declared to be invalid. the case, his been decided,

Vaughan Williamu 1. 3. said: 'In my opinion it does not matter, what must be deemed to be the real truth with regard to the validity of the patent, either in the part or in the future, or whether the order of revocation must be taken merely to bare prevented the patent from con- linuing in existence, and declared in null and void for the future, or must be taken to have declared it oull and vold ab initio, and therefore,

On being informed of the condition of affairs sever to have bad aor legal existence. For, even assuming that it had the latter effect, I am in the riverine districts, the Central Relief of opinion that it could not affect the already Commitizo yesterday basioned to prepare an I think everything turps on this; because it existing estoppel, by virtue of which the de-expedition by the steam lanach Kroong Lai to ed in the previous action was that the plaintiff which by the judgment obtained by the plain bags and other articles to assist the sufferers. is not strictly accurate to say, the point decid-fendants were prevented from denying that proceed to the fi oded districts with rice, gunay had no cause of action, or that his action was tiff in the action, had been finally determined bad in law if it had been, theo clearly there to be the truth of the matter as between those would be res judicata; for the merits of a case include its merits on the facts and its merits in law.

Now, if we apply the same test here, and ask the question, "What has the previous judg. The Chief Justice (Sir Francis Piggott) gavement of this Court decided the answer is that his decision in the matter, this forenoon, in the the right of action had been destroyed by a Supreme Court, the result being that the motion certain Ordinance. But this action depends was diamined-

on the fact that the right of action has been retrospectively restored to life; and it follows that the point in issue in this action, which is the merit of, the plaintiffs claim, although raised in the former action, has never been

In giving his judgment his Lordship said The plaintiff to this case sued the defendant for alleged criminal conversation with his wife, When the trial came on the defendant took the point that this Court had no jurisdiction to try the action; the question turned on the

decided,

A. S. WATSON & CO., How would it do for a firm of any import- ance to demand that the members of its compradore department should refrain from the smoking of opium under penalty of dis. missal? But, of course, those who advocate these drastic measures are seldom personally interested in such a question. It does not affect them one way or the other whether the adoption of such a regulation proved fatal or otherwise. Our contemporary pro ceeds to note that the fifth resolution was to thank the Government for what they had done, and this called forth much discussion, all-of-which-it-is-not necessary to follow, The resolution was carried by 18 votes to 15, but the minority expressed themselves in rather equivocal terms, which may be duc to the difficulties of translation. Some of the arguments were: Government had in creased the duty on opium but in so doing bad ruined smokers, traders and workönen: smokers no longer able to get the drug be-way of damages against a co-respondent being. Therefore, whether we look at the question came thieves; what Government should do was to increase, the duty gradually at present it all came from the towkay's pockets; if Government raised the duty again the cooltes would press the towkays for more money, raising the price had driven people from the frying pan into the fire, the morphia habit. We do not quote these point as against the speaker, but they should be made a note of, for no doust the Friend of Ching will ignore them, as it did 'the fact that the value of the remedy Combretum was entirely negatived by experience. Final- ly we have a two-columu, description of a scheme for a Chinese Government monopoly in "opium, printed in the China Critic, and chief argument is that control of the sup propounded by Viceroy Tuan Fang. The

ply must be co-ordinate with control of the consumer. À system of licenses to be inaugurated, so that consumers may be identified and registered. Here is a significant paragrapti :-"There is in opération at present, in every province of China, a system of registration under the

AND

BUBONIC PLAGUE!

It has been proved by repeated experiments that "WATSON'S HYGIENOL is the most potent agent for the destruction of fleas, especially rat finas.

It has now been proved that Plague is conveyed to human beings, by means of fleas

from rats which have died of this disease,

All risk of infection can be avoided by washing the floors, etc, or sprinkling where the fleas are likely to be with a dilute solution of "WATSON'S HYGIENOL"______A__tea-

spoonful la a pint of water, or a leacupful to three gallons, makes a solution of the strength required for this purpose.

against the plaintiff briefly for the following effect of the colonial legislation, and I decided reasons. That by the introduction of the Eng- fish. Divorce Act of 1857 Into the Colony by Ordinance No. 5 of 185", the common law at

parties as regards the questions involved in tion for criminal conversation was taken away

that action. The judgment of Moulton L. 1. here as it had been in Hogand, the remedy by

̧was directed to showing that the revocation. could not operate ab initio, on account of the substituted for it. That by the repeal of No. 5 from the point of view of the previous decision absurd consequences which would follow. But of 1858 by No. 5 of 1862, 1ke' divorce jurisdiction

ool having been on the morils, or of the issues I app content to take Vaughan Williams 1. the action for criminal conversation revived. of this Court was taken away, and thereupon is the two cases not being identical, the plea dictum as boing very sound law. But first it is But that by certain subsequent condiments, by. But there have been-certain-decisions in-as-seems to be involved.in-the-decision-arises

in my opinion fails.

to be remarked that such semblance of inequity

which a retroacine effect was given to Ordin-which the facts, in some points more pearly from the fact that the inquiry for damages was paces which had already effected repeals, this resemble this case than in what I have called, still pending; but the case should be looked revival of the action was, by an error in the

the standard cases, and these require serious at as if the proceedings had terminated drafting, destroyed. So that at the time this consideration.

with the judgment, when the principle seems action was brought the right to bring it had

much clearer. For then the case fails, well been destroyed. And I so held.

within the principle considered in Brunsden v Humphrey, which is as applicable to a defen. dant as to a plaintiff; he must bring up his whole case at the trial, and if he does not that is his fault, the question cannot be re-opened. Pat shortly, it was the defendant's fault for not having made sufficiently careful inquiries as to prior user in order to establish bin case. The subsequent proceedings showed that if he bad done so he would have won his case.

Since that judgment was given an Oidin- ance has been passed in order to rectify the mistake, and thus the right to bring this action has been again revived. This Ordinance, No. 20 of 1958, declares the effect of section 4 of the old Ordinance No. 3 of 18,5, which was the section in which the mistake had been made, of existing legislation to be imoparative and of Donc effect, and the Ordinances affected by it in fact are declared not to have been affected, but to have remained and to remain of the same force and effect as if that section had never been passed.

The plaintiff now brings bis action again

in identical terms, claiming the same re lief for the same causes, and the defendant pleads that by season of my former judgment

all, the conditions necessary to the plea are satisfied if the plea is applicable in the cir

HYGIENOL IS A POWERFUL control of provincial and subsidiary Anti-the question is rer judicata. It is admitted that

DISINFECTANT AND

GERMICIDE

Price per Pint.....................................50 cents

Gallon 62.00

opium Bureaus, but no intelligent persou will for a moment contend that these regis ters include more than a small percentage of the names that should be enrolled." l'he China Critic remarks that the consumption of opium to-day is probably as great as it was when the edict was published, and in addition there are hundreds of remedies, the. basis of which is opium," I he restriction of A. S. WATSON & CO., poppy cultivation for a time, and the closing of the opium deus, have not resulted in any LIMITON,

reduction in consumption in the districts under the control, of the officials. Here again the sole point we wish to make is that it is no use China asking for the cessation of the importation of foreign opium till

HONGKONG DISPENSARY

AND

KOWLOON DISPENSARY, Hongkong, 171b March, 1909,

DEATH.

Al Civil Hospital on the 9th instant, Dr. WILLIAM HUNTER, Government Bacter: lologist.

The funeral will pass the Manamcat at 6 p.m. 14th instabl

[473

[38 she herself has proved that she can control the growth and consumption of native opium. As in the case of our Chidese anti-opium friends, the reformer must come with clean hands. It is absurd to ask the British Go. vernment to take steps to lessen the con- sumption of opium, and at the same time complain that raising the price hampers the towkay in getting labour, and taxes his pocket. With these sentiments most fair minded people will agree, but the difficulty is to get the rampant reformer to understand the moderate standpoint.

The Hongbang Celegraph

HONGKONG, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1909.

THE OPIÙM QUESTION AGAIN.

LOCAL AND GENERAL,

A CHINESE. WOMAD, Li Ngan, twenty-eight

years of age, was knocked down by a tramcar

cumstances.

The first two arose ander the Mortgagee's Legal Costs Act, 1895. Prior to the passing of that Act, solicitor mortgagees were not allow. ed to recover their profit costs in foreclosure or redemption. It was not express law in the sense that it depended on statu:e, but the rule had been gradually worked out by the Courts oo general principles, which do not sooni ta have been finally made, clear till 1890, in the case of re Wallace. It was that care which led to the agitation, as the result of which the Act was passed allowing these costs to be recovered. The Act was made retroactive to this extent, that it applied to existing

gages and to business transacle before its

patting.

But taking the doctrice of the effect of re- roaction as stated by Lord Justice Vaughan Williams, it requires express words to undo rights already acquired, and if there are no auch words those rights must stand as acquir.

יי

claim against his mortgagor. This is what to coming back to the facts before ine, I fini bappened in Day v. Kelland; and the Court of repeat the questions which I have already put, Appeal held that the Act did not affect or based on the standard cases on "res judicats. alter rights, which were ascertained beforaits | Was the f rmer judgment of this Court on the passing.

merits of the issue raised in the present action

T

CANTON UNDER' WATER.

rainfall during the whole of last werk and the In consequence of the heavy and incertanI,

swelling of the river, all the streets to the Western suburb of this city bare baan under water knee-deep during the latter part of the day for the last few days. Great inconvenience has thus been felt by pedestrians. places people, erected temporary, bridges with from passengers, thus making a few hundred wo die boards and collect two cash each

cash.a day.

In some

VICEROY'S THOUGHIFULNESS," Viceroy Claug Jea Chuo has submitted a memorial to the Central Government reporting. on the disastrous foods. His Excellency bas received a telegram, in reply, with instructions to raise whatever possible funds to relieve the flood sufferers in order to prevent them from being left in destitución.

RELIEF JONK LOOTED. On the 3nd instant the fank Yu Cheung Lee, carrying a large quitity of rice from Canton to the district of Kwang Ning for the relief of the flood sufferers, was attacked by pirates when passing by the Samshui district. The pirates loosed the vessel. On the following days.... the guard boat stationed in the vicinity was informed of the occurrence, and the soldiers gave chase and succeeded in recovering the rice for the junk while the pirates effected their

escape.

mises occupied by Kong On (con ractor) on the

In Eyro. Wyno-Mackenzie, a solicitor morted by the judgment which has determined them, gagee has been declared by a judgment gives Here the case meets the principle of the

PARTED FRIENDS, before the passing of the Act, not entitled to decision in the solicitor mortgagee cases, which charge profit costs against the mortgagor, and also went on the fact that right bad already THE RESULT OF AN INTERESTING CASE, he applied after its passing for an extension of been acquired, and could not be undone,

These cases proceed on an accepted priaci.

This afternoon, in the Police Court, the ad time for appealing against the judgment. The point in the case was of course the leave to apple, that so far as the law is concerned rights uned case brought by two Europeaca-one The law on the subject of res judicata is up pol, and it is difficult to see how the solicitor's do not exist until they ate Racestased, and de- of whom was formerly in the employ of the to a certain point very plain; but it is encum.

case would have been in any way bettered if he emined by such ascertainment; and although Kowloon-Canton Railway-for the using of bered by a series of maxims which more or

had got his leave to appeal; for although the the rights may have been in existence for a indecent language to each other on the 19th less confuss-that-polur. The ples is really a Act was retroalive, doordear the existence long time, ret for all legal purposes, auless the ultimo, was resumed, -short form of the maxım res judicata pro vert-

of the law as it had been laid down in the judg. decreo ascertaining them otherwise orders, theyThe case for the defence being opened, "the" tate accipitur; the maxims that have gathered meats, it only altered it for the future and for are not acquired until a decree pronounces in defendant volunteered to go to the witness sound it are interest reipublicas ut att finis existing mortgages. The appeal would there favour of their existence, Acts of the parties stand. He said that on the day ju question,, me lites immortales ensent dum istigantes mor- the judgment was given. That master had been taining the sight, if they are sufficient and Litium ;-also ona which gives the reason for it, fore have upheld the law as it was af: the time may of course-take the place of a decree aacer- between $ and 6 o'clock;-be-want-into-the-pre- estis ant; and one other, nemo debat die verard closed, and really there was no existing mort-ffective

reclamation to use the telephone. Be rang up pro eadem causa, ker jüdicala is generally gage. This is what Lindley L. J, said:-Look The application of this principle to retroac

his number and was awaiting his reply when called a plea, but it is to be observed that

ing at the application as an appeal on the live legislation is established in these cases; it the other party came in and said :—" What in it is a general doctrine applicable alike to merite, it was impossible to say that the judg. alters the rights which the persons affected had there you doing here? You've got â—— plaintiffs and defendants, the occasion arising.ment was wrong as the law stood at the time before i was passed, and they may enforce check to come here. Get out of this, or I will But the last maxim I have referred 10 is really when it was given. I cannot help thinking that them, but it does not affect rights already give you in charge of the police." Witness an offshoot of the principal maxim it is sp- plication to defendants, and engendered by Lindley L. J. went further, and said that it was simple explanation is sufficient, the person have finished my mess,e?

this was sufficient to dispose of the case; but cquired, that is, determined; and this answered:"Have the decency tow. it until I

The defendant. the rule specially considered in Bruasddo v. obvious that the Act was not intended to in- who has acquired them under the law as it held out by hand, with his ñuts clenched; Humphrey, but established in older cases, a terfere with judgments which had already been existed at the time, and there is nothing left sod said: Get out." Witoess replied:-} mas cannot sue twice on the same cause of given." He might have gone fortber, and said on which the new low can operate; the ques- never intended to stay, but to go out le a action, but must exhaust bis whole case both that it was not intended to interfire with trans- | tion is in fact decided, and is res jud cata. It peaceful manner" He walked towards the for past and futers deminges; hence it has como actions concluded before it was passed. Other- | certain's sequires express words to cancel o gate; some more words ensued, the defendant to be said that a man must not be vexed twice

wise every solicitor mortgagee'since the time destro, rights which have already been deter-calilog witness a dirty name.. Witness went for the same cause. But this subsidiary maxim

when mortgages were made would have bad a miled and acquired,

across the slicet, and got into his rickaka, and goes no further than the parent maxim, for

in a fit of anger be addressed the defendant

cisely the same roles that have been laid down "cadem caus" has to be interpreted by pre

saying:-"This is white (meaning his son) there is nothing of the wonk about him.” for interpreting the doctrine of res judicata,

Cross-examined by Mr. Barlow, witness sald Now on the face of it, this cause does not

that he was discharged from his firm na appear to be one ut res judicata, for the pre-

1 felt some difficulty about these cases for between the parties? The answer must be No."|| 31st January. He had been discharged in vious decisión of the Court dues pot fit on to

they seemed at first sight to resemble the pre- | What then did that judgment decide? Toal consequence of the reduction of staff, He bad the maxim in any way. A few fragments from

sent case more than they really do. But the the right of action for crímical 'conversation'] every reason to believe that, his dismissal was different judgments will explain this prima Act is entirely different in its nature from ́was non-existent when the alleged adultery recommended by defendant. Witness" ad- - dant. A judgment is fiant only for its proper pur- did not profess to alter the law retroactive. That cannot be pleaded as res judicata in this he was trespassing facia view of the question raised by the defen- the Ordinance now noder consideration. It took place, because it had been destroyed, mitted that by catering the office of Kang On

pressly determined by sentence cannot be gain future, and to apply the law as altered to mort. Ordinance has itself been destroyed, its effect pose and object. A matter which has been exly; all it did was to alter the law for the action, the basis of which is that the destroying

said. Ac issue once taken and found is con gages made before the act was passed, which the wiped out, and everything declared to be and clusive according to the finding thereof. It is Court of Appeal held to mean, where the rights to have beco just as it was before the Ordio. necessary for the defendanisto shew in their plea of soliciter mortgagees under them bad not ance of 1895 was passed. I now put the ques that the judgment in the former action by which already been ascertained. This Ordinance tios which results from the three cases which 1 the plaintiff took nothing was inconsistent with

goes much further. It declares that the law as have jest examined. Did the defendant ac. the notion of their liability. Extracts such as it existed during the period between 1895, and quire any sights by that judgment which are in these could be accumulated to any extent; the tool was to be deemed as never having 30 issue in this action? If he did, allka on gen- idea which they endeavour to express is that existed, but to have been precisely the operal prire'ples as laid down in these cases, as the plea in order to be effective must shew that posite. Just as the law passed in 1895 blotted on the effect of repeals as laid down in the In there has been a previous litigation in which out the right to bring an action for criminal terpretation Ordinance, and which of course been thrashed out on the merits and decided. law as it existed during that period, and further would be respected, and the matter would be In fact, this idea has led to the concise state declared that it was to be deemed never to res judicata. But the only fight which he could meat of the rule in another form the previous have existed.

be said to bave acquired was not to be vaxed judgment which 16 relied on in this case was

Doring the argument I suggested what twice for the same cause; which is turning the not on the merits, bot on a highly technical seemed to be a closer analogy to this Ordin- argument in`upon itself; it în petitio principii, constraction of cartain legislation of the Colony, acce; what would have been the result if Lord and only raises again the very questions which Now this has led to a second group of cases Campbell's Act had been made retroactive'?" It | I bave been discussing, in order to ascertain in which the Coure have declined to apply the would have given a right which did not exist whether they exist or not. The only other doctrine; where a judgment has been obtained before. But would it have given a right to a possible right which is perceptible as having by a defendant in a foreign Court based upon person, say a wife, who had brought au action existed during the perică 1895-1908, is to have the statute of limitations of the country, and for damages for the negligent killing of ber criminal conversation with another man's wife | the English limiting period not baving expired; husband, and who had beco ̈non-waited ? On{wih impunity. Such was the law then, and a suit for the same cause is subrequcully further consideration I think it witer not to it has now been declared by the Legislature THE DELIMITATION QUESTION,

brought in England; the case being one le press, the analogy; for the inisation of Loid that it is to be deemed not to have been the which, although the previous judgment was Campbell's Act is obscure; and if, as some law. I am therefore of opinion that from all engaged in a moral reform must come into nese Govemment are said to insist that the judicate would otherwise have been applied right of action not in any way resembling the

A telogram from Lisbon states that the Chi- given in a foreign Court, the principle of res Judges hava thought, li gave an entirely new points of view the plea fails. It with clean hands in all moral matters rights of Portugal are limited to the town of What the Courts have said is that the former perqued action, the inquiry, if pursued further, criminal conversation with the plaintiffs wile With which everyone will agree. But fol- HECAD, and do not extend to the surrounding decision has been upon the merits, and there would lead nowhere.

|ha is alleged, is a question silti to be decided. lowing on that came a discussion on the last territory and islands, which Portugal has been fors that the doctrine of ris indicate does not

Avery loteresting game of bowls was plɛynd There remains the case of Poulton v. Adjust- Sir Henry Berkelsy, K.C., with whom was on the Police Recreation Club ground, yesterday resolution "that all employers of labour at occupying for some years. China forber apply; and the second action in England will able Cover Co, for there is a dictum of Vaughan Mr. D. V. Steavenson, of Messrs. Deacon, afternoon, between teams captained by Inspector the Conference hereby pledge themselves to declines to acknowledge Portuguese jurisdictie, although undoubtedly the defendant is Williams L. J. which goes a long way towards Looker and Deacon; represented the plaintiff, Fenton and lospector Robertson, The match do everything in their power to discourage tied to the waters of Macao. The Diario di being twice vexed for the same cause, supporting the defendant's argument in this Mr. M. W. Slade, instructed by Mr. J. Scott | résulted in a win for Mr. Roberson's tamen the use of opium amongst their employees," | Noticias, which has a semi-official" sisine,' The principle of the standard cases, which Case. A patentes brought an action for in Hastos, of Mestra. Ewens and Hariton, ap- by eleven points. The Demes of the teams and To that an amendment was proposed and declares that the British Government has inter has been shortly described thus, "You must fringement; the defence was that the patent prared for the defence.

results are appanded, whic carried for the substitution" of "will co-

-vened in favour of China, and is-is-understood ascertain what was tho essence of the former was invalid on the ground of user pilar to the

Mesin Stuart, Langley, Crani and Finton: deavour" for "hereby pledge." A practical lengthy conference on the subject with Sohor question, "What in fact has the previous judg. Judgment and, an order for laqairy lato proceeding to station abroad, other than in

that the British Minister at Lisbon" bas Bad a judgment," has been applied by asking the grant of the patent. The plaintiff 'obtained IT has been notified that the now fall dreis (skip)-92 points 40 od elamu

frocks for non-commissioned officer and men towkay said it was all very well for shop- Alarcar, Portuguese Minister for Fare gument actually decided In Harris. Quins, damages. Fending the inquiry further in India, will be packed in balk, Instead of in kit keeper who only employed a few persons. Afairs,

where the format action had been brought instances of prior user were discovered, and the bags,

you said, "This is white and not a work. ?7

Mr. Hazeland-What did you mean when

Witness-I was referring to bla*.(com. plainant's) mixed marriage.. I said so la a fit

temper.

of

Another witness was called, and he denied' that the complaisant used any threatening and. abusive language towards the defendant. He, however, said something disagreeable to defen- daut'a wile.

The next witness danied that he saw com plainant make a strike at defendant. The

In dealing with the opium question it is not unusual for those who do not see eye lo eye with the anti-brigade to be dubbed ex at Causeway Bay last evening. She was con- tremists and moral delinquents. Indeed it veyed to the Government Civil Hospital in a has been asserted that they are inclined to somewhat serious condition. Indulge in strong language when they laveigh MAJOR-GENERAL Frederick T. Hobson, who against the movement, while the anti-has just been appointed colonet of "The Buff," opiumists treat the mailer with saintly for In succession to the late Lieutenant-General bearance. "Judging from the friend of Sir Julian A. R. Raines, G.G.B., passed all bis China, which is the organ of the Society for regimental career to that distinguished regi the Suppression of the Opium Trade, the mout, entering it so far back as the year 1857, gift of emphatic utterance does not be-and eventually attaining to the command of the 2nd Battalion, then, at Hongkong, in 1881. long solely to the opposition, for in dealing "He subsequently commanded the Third ("The the question in issue ja the second action bas" conversation, so`the law of rgot blotted out the apply to this Ordinance of 1908, those rights latter's attitude was nol boitilo, £a a malter with the report delivered by the Straits Baffs) Regimental. District, Canterbury, 1887 Commission it speaks of the report as afford-91, and from 1897 to 190: he commanded the ing a "melancholy instance of the way in troops in Ceylon with the rank of major-general, which men [the commissioners] obsessed by to which he was promoted in the first mention financial considerations can ollad them ad year. With the gallant "Buffs" he went selves to the moral aspects of a grave social through the China War, 1860, including the question." It is sufficient, says the Singa- | han Mu-hued fight with the hordes of 'Chines pore Free Press in an editorial, to give this

on the plains of Sinho, the action of Tangkhu, side by side with a quotation which must be and the assuit and capture of the Taku Fors familiar to the clerics who mostly for the Society? "The charity that thinketh no evil trusts in God and trusts in man." Next is the point raised by Bishop Oldham in the Kuala Lumpur Conference, that the man

'(medal with claup).

MACAO,

||

|

Whether as a fact this_defendant did bavo

of fact he was hiding himself behind; his wife's back. The witness denied that complainat used any bad words to defendant or his wife,

Complainant-Didn't the defendant say to you that if you came into this case that you would be fiued two days' pay ?

Witness—Yes.

Didn't the defendant convey the mesinge from the firms to the effect that you need not obay the subpoena, but that you could be ar- rested?—Yos,

Mr. Barlow, having addressed the Court, kla Worship bound both parties over in the sum of a $200 each, to keep the peace for a year. He also fined the complainant Sio for the abusiva language.

LAWN-BOWLS"-

Messrs. Pitt, Watt, Sim and Robartson'(skip)» 13 points. At the conclusion of the gam

spoons were presented, to the winnin