1909-07-05 — Page 6

THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH MONDAY JULY 5. 1909.

exceedingly difficult, not to believe, but to. ness choose to allege it or even pledge understand. But there is this further his allegation by an oath. If the Court is to difficulty. Everything that took place in find molive it must be the secessary induction Mouses," Hastings' office bitween Mr. Wong from evidence laid before it and not from Hul Tong and M Dixon was through the reckless unsubstantiated statements. The only mediam of an interpreter. Everything that trace of such evidence is what I think' was the Mr. Wong saya took place might be perfectly somewhat undue haste which Mr. Hastings true and yet never have reached or bees displayed in his letter of the 30th of March -understoo 1 by Mr, Dion. There is only one suspending. Mr. Dixon' and attributing delay pisce of his evidence so far as I can see which to Mr. Dixon and his legal advisers in regard directly associates Mr, Dizon with the payment to the deed of arbitration which had been of the moneys whether for loans or the S5oo submitted to them. I think in this be was in for costs which it is alleged was embezzled. the wrong but it certainly comes well within Mr. Wong says he paid the money into Mr.what I said at first with regard to Mr. Hast, Dixon's hands. But it is with regard to this logs conduct, namely that it must be judged Case that what I said at the beginning of this not by ordinary standards, but by honest judgment is important.. The quanțion is not endeavour to put oneself. in the difficult Bot of other whether if the case had been between Messrs posltion in which he stood. Hastings and Mr. Dixon which would be en- evidence to support this allegation there

tilled to a verdict but whether the caso agalostis absolutely none. Mr. Hastings viswa man in a good position, the managing part Mr. Dixon, if it had been pressated disparas to what has been called "Mr. Dixon's slonately by a public official, has been proved. course of life" were candidly stated by him in It is not a case as to who ought to have produc- the box. It was a legitimate view and not ad Hang, the dismissed interpreter, as a wil affecied in the loast by what is euphemistically pass, but whether this case can be proved with termed the "narrow mind, but every detall out his, whether we can exercise our disciplin- which has been specified of the relationship ́ary powers in the absence of the person who official and social, between Mr. Hastings and cap alone give the evidence which would bring Mr. Dizon from the beginning down to the home the offence with which Mr. Dixon stands carly part of this year pointed to the opposits charged as a solicitor. It is said he will not conclusion and therefore looking at the coms because he would incriminate bim-elf. question as pas merely of evidence I find this That" is terelevant to this issue. He might be malicinas molive on the part of Mr. Has dead and yet the difficulty would be just the 'not substantiated in any way and there. sime, I agree that possibly the facts con fore unproved. In this jadgment I have seemed ected with the charges if well funded might perhaps to subject Mr. Hastings' action to criti bava come to Mr. Hastings' kanwled e without cism and to have left untouched Mr. Dixon's Hung. But Hung is, so the cese stands, at the baye done this deliberately because that seem. bottom of the whole thing and I ask myself this ed to be material to the great question whether question-Cao thle charge be proved without those charges were proved und because I have him as the case stands? It will he said-Look been more than anxious that every point which at the difficulties, is it fair to impons this could be argued in favour of Mr. Dixon should obligation on Messrs. Hastings? to this case have all possible weight attached leis. Eut that Yes. The question would raise entirely different must not be taken to imply that I approve of all Considerations il Meairs. Hastings had merely Mr. Dixon's actions. Some of them which are seferred to in the judgment of my learned bro. dismissed Mr. Dixon and be bad brought anther seem to be very deserving of criticism. --- action for wrongful dismissal. We coopot treat this application as if it were such an action And even if we were to act upon Mr. Tam's evidence I am bound to say that the negotia tions between Mr. Tam and Hung about get ting Hung back into the office, in which almost a promise was made in Mr. Hastings! name to take him back, seem to throw a baie over it which I am certainly nos going to attempt to dispel except to say this-it is really unneces sary to say that much inducements or half promises, or whatever they may be called as were made by Tam to Huog were not made with Mr. John Blastings authority but were the direct opposito of his intentions, ex-

have not forgotten the fact and have endeavoured 10 give it its legitimate weight but Mr. Dixon has shaped his public conduct by that of an honest men that is to say he offered to stand a public trial at the Assizes. But on the whole cose and baving in conjunction with my lenroed brother given it the most asxicus con sideration I can come to no other conclusion but this: that the confession was made by Mr Dixon as Mr. Hastings alleges and that this corroborates the evidence given by Wan Hi, the facts of that case being covered by the terms of the confession, but that it does not corroborate the Woog. Hui Tung charge. Mr. Dixon is ther. fore suspended from practising in this Court for a space of three years.

Mr. Justice Gomperiz sajd :-This is а

1

|

|

¦

|

|

Today's Advertisements.

COLONIAL SECRETARY'S DEPART- -MENT.

No 402

invited from. Europeans for the post of Tis baraby 'actified that applications are 3rd INTERPRETER at the Supreme Court. Salary commencing at $950, but should appli- cant's qualifications justify it, a salary of $1,550 may be given.

A knowledge of Cantonène is essential, and preference will be given to candidates who Applicants must be under 35 years of age. have a knowledge of a second Chinese dialect. Applications accompanied by testimonial should be sent to the Registrar General before the 31st October, 1909, b

AM. THOMSON,

Colonial Secretary:

Hongkong, and July, 1909,

FOR SALE

Tsig

SHIFT KEYS, Manufactured by. The BS FIRE-PROOF SAFES, with GODREY and Boyce ManufaĊTURING CO."of Bombay. One Safu 5 feet by 3 feet 81 in, by ± feet 6 in. Safes each feet 1 in, by a feat 7 in. by a leat

Also a few Large PADLOCKS for Godowns of the same Make.

Also one OLIVER TYPEWRITER in good condition.

'Apply to-

· PHIROZSHA B, PETIT & CO. 6. Des Voeux Road, Hongkong, 3th July, 2009.

TO LET.

Intimations.

THE

DAIRY FARM Co.,

LIMITED.

Fine Calted Australian

PIGS TROTTERS.

96 Cents a Dozen.

Hongkong, 24th June, 1909.

[517:

ASAHI BEER.

10 KENNEDY ROAD, Electric Light installed.

Apply to-

N, S.,

Cjo Hongkong Telegraph. Hongkong, 5th July, 1909. ̈ *** [518

illustrates the confession. The confession is of course fully before us-it was embodied la the affidavits, it has been gone into very fully in the evidence and it is a matter of which this court is bound to take çognizance. We have then, a painful duty to perform from which it is impose sible for us to shrink and I concur in the opinion of the Chief Justice that Mr. Dixon must be suppended from practising in this court for a term of three years,

At the conclusion of the Paisae Judge's judg- ment, there was a short consultation batwaca the presiding judges. The Chief Justice then announced that they agreed that Mr. Dixon should be suspended from practising in the Co- lony for three years,

Mr. Calthrop applied for a stay of execution until such time as they could appeal to the Privy Council

+

Mr. Potter submitted that their Lordships had no power to stop their own order,” ̃ ̃ ̄Ho`ksaw of no such case where a solicitor was found unfit

SAPPORO BEER.

during the process of a suit which Mr. Dixon Dixon as a payment on account. The case was conducting on behalf of the firm 5750 In' never, came to a hearing, the charge eventually various sums on four different cales. The after one adjournment being withdrawn by the second is to the effect that be on the 18th of 19th police. Mr. Dixon says that the balance of the of July paid Mr. Dixon, $500 for costs" to the agreed coats of $20 was never demanded by him firm, which money Mr. Dixon has retained in or paid by Wan Hl. It appears that Mr. Dixon' his own hands... I will say stancethat Wong His | bad full authority to make arrangements as to Tunggare his evidence in a clear and apparently, costs and, if he thought it, to remit the balance straightforward manner. He expressed bis re due of a sum agreed to be paid. Now Wan gret at having to testify against Mr. Dixon, Hi stains that having agreed for a sum of $50 whom he said he regarded with feelings of grati- be paid Sgo immediately and that when the case was over he paid, the balance of $20 to Ms tude, for the able manner in which he bad con.

It was suggested that the Dixon in the presence of Tam Wing Kwong ducted his case, witness was not to be believed, as be had on the 13th or 14th of January at between three reasons for wishing to oblige. Mr. Hastings or four p.m. He says that Mr. Dixen put the inasmuch as he hoped for a remission of part money into a drawer and then went out, Wan

·Hi asked for a receipt but was told that, it was. of his bill of costs, and as there was still a balance of about $300 due to him outstanding unnecessary. Nothing turns on the absence of a receipt for it is admilled that no receipt in the hands of the firm. Now the witauss wai

was given for the $30. Apparently it frequent ner of an important silk business in Canton, ly bappened that no receipt was given on the and though the suggestion must, of course, be payment of these small amounts. Was His given its proper weight a vague expectation of evidence in corroborated by that of Tam Wing this sort-pot of course alleged to be based Kwong, an interpreter of Mesan Hastinge on any promise explicit or implicit on the part and Hastings office. He says that he was of Mr. Hastings-seems hardly a sufficient present when the 530 and again when the $20 reason why he should be willing to come down

was paid, and his account of what took place from Canion and commit the gronest and corresponde substantially with that of Was most cold-blooded perjury against an inno-Hi. Now Wan Hi had been called up by the cent man. I must say that I felt extremely police in the first instance and apparently been puzzled by Wong Hui Tung's statement that kept under surveillance up to the time he want the loans to Mr. Dixon were not entered in the into the witness box. It was suggested, pot books of the firm but only in his own memo-unosturally, that he must have thought in randum book, and that the payments of them the beginning that be was being called to account for the Sio as for money he had failed fell not on all the partners but on three men only, of whom he was one. This admission is to pay and his natural impulse in that event one which might have considerable significance would be to adhere to the statement that be and I cannot help wishing that we had bad actually paid it, whether he had in fact a fuller explanation of it. However this is a done so or not. That is that he would be matter of detail which I may or may not afraid to contradict in the witness box the for- have to go into later on. Now the charges mer statements he bad made in the charge are of course very serious oues bonow-room. I am anxious to give the suggestion its ing money under the circumstances all proper welger. But we have to consider it eged with no subsequent, repayment, is along with the whole of the facts. The sug serious misconduct in a managing clerk-mis- | gestion was to my mind disposed of by the appropriating money paid for costs is simply manner. of the witness' reply to a question embezzlement. Is there any corroboration of from the Chief Justice, He answered ip_ Wong lui "ung's evidence? The only other perfectly straightforward manner that he was person alleged to have been present at these not afraid, and did not believe he was being transactions is the interpreter Hung Kam Ning required to pay again. He said that he knew who has not been called. The witness Tam he had paid, the money and understood that Wing Kwong stated that he believed Hung to the question was what someone else had done have left the Colony, Canton and Macro with it I do not expect such frankness of seems to be the natural refuge of Chinese in- demeanour from a man who knows that he is Hongkong who have reasous of their own for telling lies. It was further suggested that the not wishing to appear before a court, and. I witness had been got at by Tam before the suppose that Hung who, if he had appested Police saw him, but there is no evidence of this, would have been asked if and why he made and it was absolutely denied by Wong Hi, statements to Mr Hastings which ha after with whose demeanour I was, as I have said, vory

or untrue that he had participated with Mr. Kwong himself be admitted that he would have | preated or implied. I think in the circom

was denied to Mr.Dixon, and if it was true favourably impressed. As regarda Tam Wors stances that this is again a case in which I should

Dixon ja embezzling the money_of_tka_firm liked to get Hung back into the office and that had excellent motives, for keeping out of he had spoken to Mr. Hastings have adopted the Scotch formula "not proven"

on the subject. do not know that his❘ He furtheradmitted that he knew that Mr. Dlx- but as I cannot do so as in Wan Hi's case, Imotion for an order that the name of Clive the way,

Fletcher Dixon, a solicitor of this Court, be evidence would have been much use to either on wished to bring in another man, one Lo, as am bound to find the case is not established, subject to what I bave to say on the subject of removed from the Roll of the Court, for gross party had he actually come before us but it is interpreter, and that if Lo had come into the the alleged confession. To this alleged con misconduct in bis capacity as solicitor. The certainly very regrettable that the Court has not office he, Tam, would have resigned. It was 'facts are briefly as follows:-Mr. Dixon, who had an opportusity of seeing bim in the box, suggested that this admission showed that Tem -fassion_1_ng_turn. Now here again we are

confronted with a difficulty. A confession if admitted solicitor in England in 1899-come next to the alleged-confession can this was an unreliabin witness. The suggestion in proved cannot be pressed further than it actual. joined the firm of Hastings and Harlings, then be treated as corroboration of Wong Huifact comes to this, that Tam was so anxious to ly went. The confession was that only small Jobs Hastings, in Hongkong, in 1901, on an Tung's evidence? In my opinion, it cannot, keep Lo out of the office that he has concocted aums had been taken and in Police Court cases agreement for four years' service as an assistant Without going any further into that confession |a criminal conspiracy, supported by bli awa This would c ver Wan Hi's case but not

'on a salary of £315 a year. He received various at present, it is clear that a confession of having and other people's perjury to ruin Mr. Dixon, a | increments ia salary and commission not stipe: mis-appropriated money is na corroboration of trusted assistant who was abortly to become a lated for in his agreement during the course of charge of improperly borrowing from a client. partner is the firm. The motive assigned this service. On the 15th April, 1907, before the. On the other hand an admission of mis

seems to me inadequate for such a course. The expiry of his first agreement an agreement was appropriating small. sums only is an implicit game was really not worth the candle. The

Mr, Calthrop said that Mr. Dixon.would un-" entered into for five years dader which Mr. denial of a charge of mis-appropriating $50 witness was of course severely cross-examined dertake not to practise until appeal proceed. Dixon was to receive a higher rate in dollars which is a much larger amount. The other mat watched his demeanout closely throughout inga were over. Their only reason for adopt- with increments in commission and salary ter suggested as corroboration of the charge of and I must say that he seemed to me to being the course was on account of the stigma and also to receive at the expiration of the term misappropriation, was the evidence of Mr. Kent, telling the truth. Is there any other evidence placed on Kr. Dixon's character. a partoesship in the business. It is quite clear cashier in Messrs. Hastings and Hastings, This that can be treated as corroborative of this that the firm found Mr. Dixon a valuable man witness stated that when the interim account | charge? This brings me'to the confession' al- and the relations between them appeared to was asked for he gave the client a copy leged to have been made to Mr. Hastings and bave been such as might have been expected of the ledger account upon the express here I need add very little to the remarks of the between an enlightened employer and an able orders of Mr. Dixon. Now the ledger ac learned Chief Justice, with which I entirely agree. and trust worthy assistant. On the 2nd of Febi count was obviously quite useless to Wong At an interview of this sort both partion would ary of this year Tam Wing Kwong, a clerk in Fai Tong and he could learn nothing from naturally be somewhat agitated, and the most the office of Messrs. Heatings and Hastings it. It was suggested that Mr. Dixon pur scrupulous man might easily after the lapse of being on a visit to hung Kam Ning, as interposely had this misleading statement supplied soms weeks be mistaken as to the precise preter, who had recently quitted the service of to the client in order to prevent the latter from words used. But it is quite clear that Mr. Hast the firm, received from him certain information seeing that he bad not been credited with the ings when he wrote to his brother on the fol which he communicated to Mr. Johu Hastings, Scoo. Now Mr. Kent gave his evidence in a lowing day had no doubt at all that Mr. Dixon Mr. Hastings daw Hung in his office co, the perfectly straightforward magser and he is had admitted the mis-appropriation of money the latter informed him that Mr. Dixon had probably an extremely competent cashier but This letter was called for by Mr. Dixon's been in the habit of paying into the office part very great and he struck me in the witness box Again in his letter of March 31 be categorically his knowledge of Eöglish did not seem to be countel, on his examination of Mr. Hastings. only of monies paid by clients on account

as somewhat "puzzle-headed" Mr. Dixon repealed the admissions be says were made to of costs, retaining the balance himself and denies that he ever told Keat to give a copy of him on the 26th of that month. When he saw giving to him, Hung, part of the money the ledger account and am not at all clear Mr. Dixon #gain after receiving the letter from Though Mr. Hastings pressed him for ic

myself that though Mr. Kent believed himself | Messrs. Ewens and Háraton he taxed him with | stances he gave none saying he was unable to

to be speaking the truth the mistake was not these admissions and asked him what he' meant A discussion arose as to the costs. The do so. As a result of what be heard Mr. Hastings instituted inquiries which resulted in really his own. In that event of course the by denying them. So Mr. Hastings' attitude certain persons being discovered who bare suggested corroboration fails. Lastly there is was at any rate consistent throughout. I can

the date July 23, 1968, when the $500 was not doubt that he has accurately reported what given evidence balore us on which the present been talking with words which he himself charges are based. On the 25th of March Mr. alleged to have bees paid to Mr. Dixon. he believed at the time to have said, What About that time it appeared from Mr. Dixon's theo of Mr. Dixon's position? An innocent used. If Mr. Dixon had alleged that there was Hastings called Mr. Dixon into his room in

-etatemant-in-cross-examination_hat_be__bad -man-who-knows-that-bis-record-is-clean-finds- a mistake in Mr. Hastings' version of want ha the afremoop and told him what Mr. Hong

to find money for the payment of a paringe" himself suddenly confrunted with so odlons plot said; that there was a misunderstanding wo

Kam Ning had reported and that there was

and the luference suggested is that he would against his good name. One would expect en should, perhaps have found more difficulty in

evidence on which a criminal prosecution arriving at the truth. But he has taken up the might be brought and that he did not wish to

be therefore, short of funds and less likely to indignant denial and a fixed determination to be able to resist temptation. Hut I do not have the matter thrashed out, and to clear his position that Me. Hastings has deliberately

pracecula and advised Mr. Dixos in effect to perjured himself before the Court, has wilfully slip away quietly and without scandal, Ms. think the corroboration to be sufficiently direct reputation at all costs. We find instead a spon- perverted what be said, has put into his mouth Hastings says that Mr. Dixon crofessed to bavit does not go far enough. Whether Mr.taneous offer to leave the firm, abandoning his things that his never said, that he has done this ing taken money but in small sums only, and with the means legitimately at his disposal Ivantages of his agreement and an undertaking Dixon was able to keep up his establishment rights to a partnership and to the other ad- - out of sheer malevolence, and "with the altetlar -asked-to-be given another chance. This Mr.

design conceived same time since of getting Dizan denies and says that he admitted having do not know. But that Mr. Dixon was not offered not to take away clients of the firm-in rid of him, that it is all part of a deeply laid taken presenze, but entirely denied any misap bard up in the ordinary meaning of these words retom for what?- permission to be allowed scheme devised in order to rid himself of a pri priation. On March 1st Mr. Hastings rohe bad then $4,000 out as mortgage. If he do not think I am unfair to Mr. Dixon when in 1908 sufficiently appears from the fact that to practise op bis own account in the Colony, maunglog clerk to whom many material to Mr. Lizon stating that he must leave the office, benefits were in process of time seem to as it was impossible for the firm to keep him had to find money then in July he was not I say that I should have expected a firmer driven to dishonesty. He had merely to call attitude in the face of the calumny from a man become due in order to economiss the money any longer, 'and enclosing for signature an that there benefits would cost the firm, agreement concelling theagreement for service. in the money out on mortgage. All the sug of Mr. Dixon's character and ability." Again 'Singapore for this port on 3rd inst, at 7:30a.m.,

grounds of corroboration therefore fail, himself. To this question put by Mr. Poller ther note on the 2nd of April requesting that I must then reject the charges based on Wong Dixon at the interview was the interpreter what motive he attributed to Mr. Haminga T the cancellation agreement: might be signed Hui Tangle evidence. I do not for a moment Hong and Hong was the only authority then making the statement relating to the confession and returned to bim. On the same day Mekers. ggest that he has committed perjury. But named by Mr. Hastings. If the charges were Mer Dixon would have been entitled to say he Ewens and Harston wrote a letter on behalf of charges of this sort must be fully substantiated, false then Hung was a liar and a very despicable

10.30 Len. to 72.00 B.. MAKYWY to minutes spoke to facts alone and was not obliged to Mr. Dizon denying that. Mr. Dixon, admitted and is canot be done they must be dis scoundrel. Yet this man was apparently the das to arrive at 6 am, on 7th last 18.45am to IBOO BOOM 15 search for motive but he deliberately answered | having taken money and insisting misand. I come new to the third charge, which frat person with whom Mr. Dixon put him his morning, at 6 am, and may be expected The M. M. Co's us. Caledonien left Saigon the question and attributed the motives as I his rights under the agreement of service, routs on the evidenca of Wan Hi-that he self lato communication "and; he thought to arrive here on fith inst, and will leave for have ours specified them. By this he must And Beally suggesting & mesting between is admitted that the firm was never creat als own house before be even took counsel

„ite advisable to have a privalo interview | Shanghai and Japan on the same afternoon. stand or fall. I disbelieve the axistence of the Mr. Hanion and Mr. Hastings. It was pro-dited with this amouet MrDixon-states with his solicitor. It is with great regret that 1 RETURN of Viators to the City Hall Library motives which he has attributed to Mr. John posed that the matter abould be subject that on the 8th of January of this year he was re- compelled to the conclusion that there was Hastings, not because he is the senior partner of no arbitration, before the Chief Justice of leading Grm of solicitors and Mr. Dixon and negotiations continued for some time, but tained by Was Hi to defend a friend of the no mistake and that the confession is stabila and Museum for the week ending the 4th

latter's in the Police Court. It was agreed that ad against Mr. Dixon. Once this is accepted

July, 1909 vonly, his managing clark but because I would aventually falling the present proceedings were.

not believe this of any man. In the abasco brought. I will deal shortly, with the specific 550 should be paid for come with a proviso for it strengthens the charge at to the Sto which I of avidasca laading me inevitably to this con- Chigns which, are before us. The first two fuller payment is the event of the hearing lastest regard to fully established. One clusion: The Court does not assume motive, are based on the evidence of Wong His Tunging over ong day. The sum of $30 was paid at

Mat ho lent to Mr. Qikon at the latter'a peenem once, and entered in the rough cath book by M

Wong's Cass. But there is a far more serious matter to which I called the attention of the learned Counsel engaged. At the opening of the case Mr. Calibrop very wisely asked for the charges against his client to be formulat. ed, and thay were formulated. Put this was for The cake of giving precision to the case. It could not possibly be said to be as in the object of charger formula ed ag inst a civil servant, In order to inform Mr. Dixon of what he wai

a

charged with, that was contained in the affiday, fts filed on the application for the role and the question is whether we can ignore the fact that there is an allegation made in these si davits that Mr. Dixon had confessed to having appropriated small aums belonging to the firm, I do not stink we can look at it as merely piece of corr-borative evidence but as itself embodying a charge which is brought to the Court. I think therefors that we are bound to Inquire whether the confession was made as alleged. Now in considering this I am moved by po corsideration other than that of nicer tiining which of two persons, both solicitors of this Count, is speaking the truth. Mr. Hastings asserts that Mr. Dixon made a definite confer Bios. Mr. Dixon absolutely denies it. Nothing is more difficult in such circumstances to decide such a question, Humad memory is 10 fallible that it is quite a commno eccurrente for an honourable man in reporting a conversa tion to put into the mouth of the person he his

|

next day, and on successive occasions, when

a

|

paid Mr. Dixon Sze for balance of costs. It'

1

mattár is the complament:

to continue as an officer of the Court. He ad mitted the right to appeal but no stay of execu tion could be granted pending that appeal. It was unfair for the profession to allow Mr. Dixon to continue,

The Puise Judge (To Mr. Calthrop)-We have expressed our opinion and delivered our Judgment. What advantage would Mr. Dixon have if a stay of execution was granted? 1 don't quite see the point.

Mr. Calthrop was heard to remark there was an advantage..

The Chief Justice said it was impossible to compel Messrs. Hastings and Hastings to tako.. Mr. Dixon in their employ.

Mr. Calthrop-We are not asking for that. **The Chief Justice—Then, I may`taks if that' you wish the judgment not to be placed in the records of the Court.

asking for.

Mr. Calibrop-That is exactly what wo are

The Chief Justice remarked about the diffi-

Cottles of the position and ordered judgment pot to be recorded until the Privy Council pro- cudings were overr

Chief Justice intimated that this question would be settled in the maual way by the Registrar

SHIPPING AND MAILS

MAILS DUE,

English (Dalia) 7th ́inst., 3 ́p.m. Canadian (Montsogis) 7th inst,, French (Caledonien) Eth iast. Australian (Tarynas) 14th, inst,

4th inst, and is dus bere on 7th fast...

The C. N. Cols 1.5, Chenam loft Shanghal on

The Apcar Co.'s 13. Japan fram Yokohama and Kobe, left Kobe this morning, and may be expected here on 11th inst..

The "Ben Linn ss. Bedlarte, from Laith, Autwerp, Middlesbro' and London left Singa pore on 3rd inst., for this port.

The F. & O. S. N. Col sa Dalia Jult

kere on 7th inst, at 3 pm,

The C. P. R. Cols sa. Monfangle arrived at. Shanghai at 5 am, on th insis, and left again at noon, same day for Hongkong, where she is

Non-Chi

Uklaces

others a con..

|

OBTAINABLE EVERYWHERE.

MITSUI BUSSAN KAISHA,

Sole Agents.

(473)

THE CHINA PROVIDENT LOAN ́ ́ ́AND,

BAL MORTGAGE CO. LD.^*,

($1,350,000)

(Capital Paid Or

Loans on Mortgage of House Property, &c. Goods received on Storage. Advances made on Merchandise." Loans made on the Provident System.

(Rates and Particulars on application),

THE OFFICE OPN, TRUSTER, EXFOFTOR OF WILLS,

ATTORNEY, &c., *** Undertaken and Rescued (

SHEWAN, TOMES &'Co,

General Managers=""

'Rongkong,`roth-March, vóc %!

PRAK TRAMWAYS COMPANY

1,00 am.

LIMITED.

TIME TABLE

WEEK DAYE,

7.30 km 10 10,00 KES, SVĒTOry 10 minutes 10,00 km. 143. 12,00 am, „Every 15 minutes:: (41,30 KM. 19 1145 pm. „Erary 15 minutas, 1345 pm to 11f piimEvery to minutas, £15 pm, to -1.45 pati ...Kvary 15 minutes); 1.45 p.m. to 2.75 p.m. 4.Every to minutar 3.15 p.m. to 300 pač,Evay 15 minutes)

Every 15 minutas, 1:30 pm. to 500 1.38. 5.00 p.m. to .copum, malvery to alwDEN)

NIGHT CARS, 145 p.m; and

..

9 pm, 9.45 pm, 19 18.15 p.k. every half hour. ANG SUNDAYI, A 8.00 am to 9.00 km, miEvery 15 minutes. 9.00 am, to 9.30 6.31. 2. Every 30 minutes. 9:30 am to 20,30 käi, 200-TRay: 15 minutes

Noon to 1,00 putum. Every to

1.00 pm to 5.00 p.m.)... Zve

-

5.00 pm to 6.00 pm, ml

6.00 p.m. to: 7.00 p.m. »

7.00 . to Loo

MIGHT