1929-11-02 — Page 3

GENERAL ELECTRIC

18

L-STEBL ÁEFRIGERATOR

Makes it safe to be hungry!”

We invite comparison

with all others

ป. 1

an hermetically sealed, dust proof mechanism.

.control. ...an easily accessible temperature.com ... mechanism that requites to oiling.

all troublesome machinery,eifminated,

new standard of quiet operation

mounted on legs with broom-100m underneath, no lustallation problem whatever.

a sanitary, porcelain chilling chamber.

the satire mechanism mounted on tap. ...absolutely no radio Interference.

maximum food storage space in the cabinet.

...an appreciably lower cost of operation.

a radically improved type of cabinet.

an unqualified two-year guarantee.

GENERAL ELECTRIC

ALENTEEL GEFRIGERATOR

A'small down payment places one in your home. On View at

flongkong Electric Co. Ltd. General Electric Co. (Chiba) Ltd.

Wm. C. Jack & Co., Ltd. ANDERSEN, MEYER & CO., LTD,

David House.

THE HONGKONG TELEGRAPH. · SATURDAY, NOVEMBER

Messrs. KOMOR & KOMOR'S

AUTUMN

EXHIBITION

of

WATER COLOURS AND OIL PAINTINGS.

PICTURES

by the foremost Artists of Japan will be open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

for

10 DAYS ONLY

Prices ranging from 2. Dollars upwards The most suitable Wedding or Xmas Presents

Come early to have first choice!

KOMOR & KOMOR

Art and Curio Experts St. George's Building Corner of Chater Rond and Ice House St.

WATCH YOUR THROAT THIS WINTER/

Doni lake risks.

The

antiseptic vapoura liberated by Evans Pastilles quickly kill the germs that lurk in the obscura byaways of the nose, throat and chest, soothing the affected parts. Doctors strongly recommend that'

EVANS' Pastilles

ANTISEPTIC THROAT

Made in England so the formida of the Liverpoo Throat Hospital and solid by Chemitis everja Nera.

For the 'Best

LOCAL VIEWS

PORTRAIT

and

PHOTOGRAPHS

Go To MEE CHEUNG

Studio, Ice House St

Branch 7, Beaconsfiold Arcado.

CHARGES OF FRAUD DISMISSED.

PARTNER IN CHINESE PIRM

ACQUITTEN,

Expressing himself satisfied that the prosecution had failed to make out a prima facie case, the charges of embezzlement of capital funds and the forgery of, a, Chinese bor- rowing note, preferred by Won Sook-to, partner in the Wing Hing Heme against Yau Ka-wal, a fellow partner; were yesterday dismissed ME. A. M. G. H. Grantham, at the Contral Magistracy.

Mr. E S. C. Brooks, who prosecuted, at yesterday's hear- ing declared that the South China Morning Post had published a full report of the accusations made by counsel for the defence concern- ing alleged misappropriations of the company's monies by the com- plainant, yet, he said, had ignored in their subsequent report, Mr. Jonkin's withilrawals of those accusations,

Both Mr. Granthum and Mr. Jenkins said they were unawaro that such accusations were ever made,

posed to call, and Mr. Brooks re- plied there were two more, but if He took it that his friend had with- drawn his accusation that his client and his son acted in col laboration to withdraw monies frer the firm, he would only have to el one other witness.

- Mr. Jenkin:Wall, then, let's shake hands and withdraw all ac ensations, I mean youra" as well.

Mr. Brouka:-Oh dear no!

Mr. Grantham:---Yesterday you did not deny that a certain amount was withdrawn by your client and Els son.

+

Mr. Brooks:--Yes." One or two. small amounts. The suggestion yesterday was that all the sums were drawn through Wong Sum. the sort.

+

Mr. Jenkin-I kept telling the complainant yesterday that I was muking no charges against him

Mr. Brooks:-You Becused him that he had forced the defendant to retire from the business, that he had brought the firm to the verge of bankruptcy and that he had taken from the till $10.000. You also used the word misappro priation.

Mr. Grantham:-1 have no note or recollection of the word "misap-

Addressing his Worship, Mr.propriation." Did you use it Mr.

com-

Jonkin?

Mr. Junkin:--I won't deny I did use it, because I might have done.

Mr. Brooks said if his friend waa willing to withdraw those accusa. tions be would have no need to call Wong fum, but if not, he would call bim to prove there was no misap-

Brooks said that in the paper, on Thursday morning 'there appeared a very full account of his friend's cross-examination of the plainant, and much had been made of the point that his elicet, had misappropriated funds, hut there had been no publication of the fact that his friend later withdrewpropriation. those accusations, and he" would ike his Worship to ask the Press to make a note of this. „Anyone reading the paragraph would naturally assume that the com- plainant had been appropriating funds for his own use.

וי'

Mr. Grantham:-Which part of the répart are you complaining about?

Mr. Brooks:--don't complain of any particular itera, but of the whole tene of it. The headings themselves are suggestive.

Mr. Grantham:-Are you com plaining that the report is in accurate?

Mr. Brooks:-No. It Is a per- fectly accurate report, but the point is that my friend withdrew all of his hecusations against, my client, and that did not appear in the press this morning

Mr. P. C.

Junkin ---1 did not

Know I withdrew anything. I did not know that I even made any de- Ausations,

His Worship pointed out that the complainant admitted that he had taken money for himself.

Accountant Called,

Wong Lum was then called, and he said he was accountant in the Wing Hing firm from June, 1926, antil February this year. Durlog that time the complainant made certain drawings through him, anid he kept a record of those payments. Everything that was drawn known to the partners,

WOB

Mr. Jenkin: These records an not appear in the books of the firm or the balance sheet?-Nd They were known to everybody and were on mere paper.

After the calling of the police oficer who stated that he charged and enutioned the defendant, who replied in a written statement that he did not embezzle nor did he after the cash book," the case for the prosecution closed.

had no case to answer, said that if Mr. Jenkin in submitting that he

the defendant was sent before a jury, they would stop the case halt way through the cross-examination of the complainant. The fact that the complainant was supplanted as Mr. Brooks replied that was true,nianaging partner by the defendant but they were only two small under the circumstances which amounts, and not the whole amount emerged in the early part of his like the defence had suggested. He cross-examination, must raise fu was surprised that his friend did the minds of any tribunal queries not remember withdrawing the ac as to the bow files, of the prosecu.

tion. He submitted that the rea son for the complainant taking the action he had was out of pure re venge

sations.

Ar. Grantham The word "mis appropriation" was not use The first time I heard it was in your (Mr. Brooks' re-examination. Mr. Bronks:--The word was used. I must be emphatic about-

fit.

Mr. Grantham: What estetty are you complaining of?

Mr. Brucks

It was because you stated it that did not re-examine my client on it My friend got up and said. "I with

· draw that?"

Mr. Grantham:-- don't remem- her it. I have no record in my notes of it here.

In none of the counts had the prosecution made out a prima facie. Pease, contended Mr. Jenkin, and they had failed to prove either fraid er forgery.

Mr. Brooks said that it was very difficult trying to convince his Worship that he had a ense if he

the

MP. Brooks:-My point is that anyone reading the report would think that my client had misappro- priated monies. Yesterday, mynd already made up his mind on friend withdrew those accusations, the point. Unfortunately during

Mr. Jenkin: -- Honestly I have ne the long cross-examination revsillection.

main point of the case had been an astonished rather lost. The real point was that defendant and his brother-In: law issued writs and brought an action against the firm for $11.000, and swore that the amount stated was correct. Now, however, they had had evidence that it was in- correct, and that the defendant knew it was an incorrect amount for which he obtained judgment in Continuing

the Supreme Court...It was a most address magistrate, Mr. Brooks said, there serious thing, and he felt sure that were only two points he wished the would take a most serious view if it came before the Chief Justice, re-examine his client and to

of it. bring before his Worship. He wished to clear up the point as to They had it in the books sub whether the three documents in mitted that the total amount de exhibit No. 3; which were merition-paited to the defendant's brother- ed in the previous day's cross-in-law up to the end of 1928 was examination, had anything or $3,800, and yet he brought a writ nothing to do with the case.

Two Points.

14

the

Mr. Jenkin:--Your client stated there was no importance, in those papers. Are you not satisfied with

that?

Mr. Brooks-No I am not,

Mr. Brook's then asked com- plainant if he had anything to say with regard to the first item in the exhibit S3, and witness replied that the entry was identical with that in one of the papers which had been torn out.

Mr. Brooks:--And each item here is identicni with one that appears in the book now? Yes.

to the Supreme Court for $11,000. He submitted it was a serious thing, and that the defendant should at least make some explanation of his extraordinary actions.

Magistrate's Decision,

Mr. Grantham, In making known his decision, said that because o partner used a chop when, accord. ing to the rules of a business, he should not do so, did not con- stitute forgery. To exceed his authority to use a chop was not forgery. The prosecution had got to prove intention to defraud.

་་

Following upon further re-ex; The chief complaint of the pro- amination concerning items and secution was that the defendant entries in certain of the books, Mr. did not transfer certain figures. Grantham asked Mr. Brooks if he from the outer counter book into was quite satisfied that he was go-the inner counter book. Even if ing to make out u case,

Mr. Brooks: Most certainly I

am,

Mr. Grantham:-I just wanted to know if you are satisfied..

Mr. Brooks said he would have much to say when it came to the defence,

Mr. Jenkin: You must make out your case before we come to the defence.

Mr. Brooks:-Oh, I know that.

More Witnesse Mr. Grantham asked how many more witnesses the prosecution pro-

the defendant did not adopt this one and only, true method, it did not constitute fraud, because tho figures were in the outer counter book for all to see. The defendant could adopt what form of book keeping he liked, so long as it was honest. No sane man would bring up a charge of forgery on auch ä point, and if the thing was not serious, it would be laughable.

With regard to the taking over of the shares, the complainant ad mitted he did not say that the cn tries were forgeries, but simply that they were not entered in the

1929,

ELITE

STYLES

THE LITTLE STORE IN THE A.P.C. BUILDING

ANNOUNCES

It's

THE ARRIVAL

OF A WIDE SELECTION OF-

NEW

INCLUDING

GOODS

HAND-BAGS

DAINTY FELT HATS

OVERCOAT MATERIALS

FUR CUFFS AND COLLARS

KID AND LEATHER GLOVES

JAEGER

3-Piece Woollen Suits

EVENING WEAR FLOWERS

and many other novelties.

THE STORE FOR RELIABLE GOODS AT REASONABLE PRICES.

1,

BETTER

CAPSTAN (RAVY CUT)

MEDIUM

WDAHO WILLS

to buy

CAPSTAN

CIGARETTES

This advartionment is issued by the Britishy American Tobacco Co. (China) Led EB-937

proper form. Surely the complainant way he liked, so long as they were fold their arms, for it was for the was hardly the sort of man to make done honestly. It was for the pro- prosecution to make out a prima remarks about the way other people! socution to prove positively that facie caso, and he did not think should keep accounts? The de there had been Intent to defraud. they had done that, "All the fendant was managing partner and -There was no onus on the de charges would therefore he die he could keep the accounts which fence. They could alt back and missed.