250
danger to the public that may arise by this Board not getting correct information, and that he be requested to take the necessary steps for the infliction of a penalty in case false information is given to the Board, and that the addition bubonic plague" should be made to those diseases to which the present law applies. I propose that we draw up a by-law and take the opinion of the legal adviser to the Crown upon it.
The resolution was seconded and carried.
MORTALITY STATISTICS.
For the week ended 14th September the death rate was 26.2 per 1,000 per annum as com- pared with 20.2 at the corresponding period lust year. The death rate for week ended 21st September was 27.2, and at the corresponding period last year the rate was 16.1. The feature of most importance in the first return was the death recorded from bubonic plague.
ADJOURNMENT.
The Board adjourned until Thursday week.
THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE FAIRWAY:
!
THE MAGISTRATE REVERSES HIS FORMER
DECISION.
At the Magistracy on Wednesday, before Hon. H. E. Wodehouse, the hearing was resumed of the case in which three lightermen in the em ploy of the P. & O. Company were charged with obstructing the northern fairway with lighters on the 18th July last. Mr. Dennys appeared for the defence. When the case was last before the Court the evidence for the prosecution was completed, and Mr. Dennys asked for an ad- journment until the Khedive returned to Hong- kong, so that the captain might be called. The evidence for the prosecution was that the lighters drifted across and so obstructed the fairway while the Peru was coming in, that the cap. tain of the Peru had to reverse engines in order to avoid a collision. When the case was first heard the Magistrate discharged the defendants, but it was re-opened at the request of Hon. Commander W. C. H. Hastings.
Before calling his witness My Dennys said that if the Magistrate imposed fine it would be paid by the P. and O. Company.
were
Captain Daniel, of the P. & O. Khedive, said -I was in Hongkong harbour on 18th July, and the Khedive was leaving for England. The regular time. for leaving was noon, but we did not get away until about a quarter to one, as we were waiting for dispatches. Just as we were leaving I saw the Peru coming in. The P. & O. tug was towing the stern of the Khedive round. There
some lighters alongside and they left the ship when we left for stations. The lighters were alongside the ship two hours before we started, and I do not know what became of them. I saw the Peru stopped and her engines were reversed. She was delayed about two or three minutes. I do not know what was the reason for the delay. I saw her go to her buoy. I did not see any obstruction of the fairway. Seven minutes was not an unreasonable time for the lighters to go from the Khedive to the Verona. The tug did not tow the lighters, but I suppose she would have done so if it had been necessary.
Hon. Commander Hastings, Acting Captain Superintendent of Police-I should like to ask the witness a question.
The Magistrate You can ask your questions
through me.
The Acting Captain Superintendent of Police --If the witness had been in the Peru, and had had his engines stopped for five minutes before taking his buoy, would he have considered three lighters drifting across the fairway any obstruc-
tion ?
The Magistrate-There is no necessity to put that question. It is for me to decide whether
there was an obstruction.
No more questions were asked.
Mr. Dennys When I applied for an adjourn ment I had not had an opportunity of seeing Captain Daniel, who was on his way to Bombay, and I was relying upon what I was told as to the evidence the captain would give. I think your Worship must now come to the conclusion that there really was no obstruction. Of course the Peru was delayed, but she would have been delayed if another steamer had been crossing the fairway.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
|*
[October 2, 1895.
STEAMBOAT CO., LIMITED.
The Acting Captain Superintendent of Police | HONGKONG, CANTON, AND MACAO ---Another steamer would have been under con- trol; these were helpless craft drifting across the fairway. The captain of the Peru had to go full speed astern in order—
me.
The Magistrate-Mr. Dennys was addressing
Have you finished Mr. Dennys ? Mr. Dennys-No, your Worship. It is not fair to bring these lightermen--of course it is practically the P. and O. Company that is summoned under the section of the Ordinance. This section deals with the fairways in the harbour and is not intended to prevent people crossing the fairway in lighters, junks, launches, or anything else. It is to prevent them an- choring there, or, I quite admit, drifting about for an uncertain time without being under control in any way. Here was the P. and O. mail steamer going away to England. Along- side the mail, according to the captain's evidence, was a steam tug belonging to the P. and O. which is employed in bringing lighters away Instead of moving the lighters she was towing the stern of the mail steamer round, so as to enable her to get a fair start. The tug was close at hand, and could have been signalled for, at any moment and could have gone
to
or
the lighters if there had been any necessity. These lighters went straight across from one P. and O. buoy to the other P. and O. buoy. I am unable to produce any evidence to show that they had a line across, but I urge on behalf of the defendants that they ran a line up to the Verona's buoy, and they went across on that line. I think your Worship must believe the story of the policemau, who said that they took only seven minutes to go across. They could not have drifted across without any rope or anything at all in seven minutes. I submit there was no obstruction of the fairway in the sense of the Ordinance. If your Worship reads the Ordinance 26 of, 1891, section 26, you will find that it states No vessel or boat of any description shall be allowed to anchor within any fairway which shall be set apart by the Harbour Master for the passage of vessels, and the master or other person in charge of any such boat dropping anchor in otherwise obstructing such fairway," &c. If a vessel is coming down the fairway and a yacht or a junk or a launch is crossing the fair- way and consequently the vessel has to stop it cannot be said that such vessel crossing is causing an obstruction. Your Worship re-opened the case at the request of the Acting Superintendent of Police, and in the first place yon decided that there was not a reasonable obstruction accord- ing to the law, and that the lighters were going across the fairway at a reasonable speed, The case was dismissed on 24th July and re- opened on the 26th July. I am sure if your Worship takes into consideration the evidence given by Captain Daniel you will come to the conclusion that there was no obstruction, as the steam tug was close at hand and could have been used if there had been any necessity.
The Acting Captain Superintendent of Police -Mr. Dennys has not brought— :
The Magistrate Under what circumstances did I reopen the case? I forget.
The Acting Captain Superintendent of Police -I applied for a re-hearing under the Magis- trates Ordinance.
:
Mr. Dennys-On the last occasion your Worship said that on the evidence as it then stood you were inclined to think that you had made a mistake in dismissing the case, and your Worship said you would give me an opportunity of calling Captain Daniel. His evidence cer- tainly helps the case of the lightermen con siderably. As I said, the police evidence is quite sufficient to show that they went from one buoy that is a reasonable speed. They were not to another in seven minutes, and I submit anchoring in the fairway or obstructing it in
any way.
The Magistrate, without calling upon the Acting Captain Superintendent of Police, said
I fine each defendant $50.
Mr, Dennys-What is that, your Worship? Each defendant fined $50!
The Magistrate-Yes, each defendant is fined $50.
Mr. Dennys-Your Worship will give me leave to appeal, if necessary?
The Magistrate Of course,
An extraordinary general meeting of share- holders in the Hongkong, Canton, and Macao Steamboat Company, Limited, was held on Mon- day at the offices of the Company. Hon. E. R. Belilios presided, and there were also present- Hon. J. J. Bell-Irving, Messrs. F. A. Gomes, J. Kramer, N. A. Siebs (Directors), V. H. Deacon (Solicitor to the Company), C. Tomlin (Acting Secretary), G. Fenwick, E. J. Moses, F. M. Gomez, G. Sharp, S. S. Benjamin, A. S. Manners, G. H. Potts, C. W. Richards, H. E. Tomkins, A. Fukeera, Captain Tillett, Woo Hon, Chun Chai, Chan Ufai, and Ai Shing. Thirty-eight shareholders were repre- sented by proxy.
once received
The CHAIRMAN-Gentleman, it will be in your recollection that at two of our recent meet- ings, on the 30th July, 1894, and on the 3rd August, 1895, suggestions have been made by certain shareholders to the effect that a portion of the subscribed capital might be returned. The first time the question was mooted no pro- posal with regard to the sum desired was offered, but at the later meeting it was suggested that five dollars per share might be returned. On both occasions the Chairman. speaking for the Board, intimated their desire to meet the wishes of the shareholders, provided their proposal found general support. The matter being one that re- quired thought and deliberation, it was suggested that the true wishes of the shareholders could be best ascertained by summoning an extraordinary meeting for the purpose, and if a majority voted for the return of capital to give effect to such resolution. Many shareholders considering the suggestion for a return of $5 per share as rea- sonable and feasible, in response to this invita- tion by the Board, addressed the following requisition to the directors: We, the under- signed shareholders of the Company, hereby request you to call an extraordinary meeting of the shareholders of the Company for the purpose of passing a resolution for the return to the shareholders of five dollars per share from the capital or reserve fund of the Com- pany. Dated the 6th day of August, 1895." This requisition was signed by 48 shareholders holding 20,327 shares, and at the attention it merited. The requisitionists. desired a return either from the capital or the reserve fund. Well, gentlemen, the Board are unanimously of opinion that the latter course would be a most injudicious one, firstly, because we look upon the reserve as an insur- ance fund, on the strength of which we partly underwrite
steamers, and, secondly, because we make interest on this fund, which goes to augment our profits. It is otherwise with our capital, on which we are obliged to pay a dividend the gentleman principally interested in this movement called on me, and after some discussion fell in with the view that if a return be made it should be made from the capital. The question was then fully threshed out at a Board meeting, with the result that an advertisement was inserted in the papers, which the Secretary read. We have accordingly met here to-day to consider the resolution and decide. pass or reject it as the majority may But
resolution before putting this
to the meeting, gentlemen, it is my duty to lay before you the pros and cons involved. Frankly, I must tell you the majority of the directors are opposed to the step, as they think it will be a mistake to make a return of capital. They are of opinion that such return will weaken the position of the Company, and render it open to attack by a strongly organised oppo- sition on the river. They believe that if the West River is opened to foreign trade the the stationing of hulks and the erection of traffic may become so extensive as to necessitate godowns at several way ports, as is done on the Yangtsze, while it might also be compulsory to build different descriptions of vessels for the various branches of the great water- way. For these purposes a large capital will be required, and should be retained. Our present large capital is, in fact, our great strength, not only to avail ourselves of oppor- tunities for increasing our business but to meet: and resist opposition, provide new steamers, hulks, wharves, etc., etc. On the other hand, shareholders who advocate the return of capital
our
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.