* November 13, 1895.]
ness, and it is expected that in a very short time the Hakka troubles will be either "mended or ended," and that the aborigines, towards whom `a most conciliatory policy is to be adopted, will
be-gradually brought into line.
The troops round Tainanfu and Anping are suffering much from the local fever for which those places have so unenviable a notoriety. Although a good deal of bowel complaints are prevalent there does not seem to be any reason for assuming that cholera exists or is likely to break out.
The extremely cold weather, which has set in rather early this year, seems to oppose such diseases, though, as is always the case, the N.E. winds, which set up this cold, bring with them. as they blow over the alluvial plains, the malignant malarial virus accounting for the great numbers of cases met with among the troops.
JAMES W.DAVIDSON.
SUPREME COURT.
6th November.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE SIR FIELDING. CLARKE (CHIEF JUSTICE).
IN THE MATTER OF THE BANKRUPTCY ORDINANCE, 1864. AND IN THE MATTER
with
OF CHAN LONG HING, BANKRUPT. Mr. V. H. Deacon moved, on the part of Mr. F. A. Hazeland, official assignee in the above bankruptcy,
that the official assignee may join
Chun Kum, widow, Choa Chee Bea, compradore, and Choa Leep Chee, in paying off in equal proportions & mortgage dated 5th July, 1889, made between the said Choa Leep Chee, on the one part, and the Hongkong. Canton, and Macao Steamboat Company, Limited, of the other part, and registered at the Land Office on the 9th July, 1889, being a mortgage on section A of Inland lot No. 121, to secure $18,000 and interest; and farther may join with the said Chun Kum, Choa Chee Bee, and Choa Leep Cheo, in selling and assigning the same premises to William Edgar Van Eps, commission agent, for the price of $25,100, to be paid to the said official assignee and Chun Kum, Choa Chee Bee, and Choa Loep Chee, in equal fourth parts or shares, and further that the official assignee may execute all necessary deeds and writings in the premises.
His Lordship granted the order subject to the offical assignee filing an affidavit to the affect that he was satisfied with the price offered.
6th November.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE MR. A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGE).
ANDREW v. HOLDSWORTH.
The plaintiff, Mr J. Andrew, commission agent, sued Mr. C. Holdsworth, of the Eastern Mica Works, for $250.81, the price of asbestos delivered to the defendant. Mr Ewens ap- peared for the plaintiff, and Mr Grist for the defendant.
Mr Ewens said the question in dispute was the price which the plaintiff agreed to sell the asbestos for. Plaintiff said he sold it at 51 cents a lb.; defendant, on the other hand, said he bought the whole of it for $100, which he had paid into court.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
The plaintiff gave evidence and said-I am a commission agent. Some time back I sold two tons of asbestos to the defendant, who was anxious to cover a boiler on the Mongkul. The price agreed upon was 5 cents a lb. for weight delivered, and defendant was to pay cost of delivery. Nothing was said about defendant paying $100 for the whole lot; the defendant agreed to pay 5 cents a lb. There was no written contract. The defendant said he would pay my clerk $10 if the asbestos was delivered and defendant sent a cheque for $12, which I handed over to my clerk as I thought it was *** cumshaw."
|
By Mr. Grist The arrangement was made in May. I do not know whether the asbestos was more or less damaged; it was not understood that it was damaged. I said I had about two toos. Defendant did not say he would give me $100 for the lot I did not deliver an invoice. About 10th June defendant tendered a cheque for $100, which I refused. I think I gave him the debit note before the cheque was offered me. I do not know whether Captain Murray was present when the price was agreed upon, and I cannot say whether Mr. Willson, of Brewer's, was also present. Defendant might have said "Take this cheque and refer the matter to Captain Murray' The asbestos can be bought for less than cents a lb.; the market value, though, was not less than that. Special lots might be got from Japan at 44 cents a lb..
11
A. Mahommed, plaintiff's clerk, spoke to de- livering the asbestos.
Mr. Grist said the defence was that the amount agreed upon was $100 for the whole lot, and this sum had been paid into court.
The plaintiff said I am the proprietor of the Eastern Mica Works, Quarry Bay. I bought the asbestos from the plaintiff last May. I was in the Hongkong Hotel inquiring whether some mica powder had come from Calcutta, as I had an important job to do. The plaintiff brought me a sample of stuff, which was a mixture of asbestos and other things, including lime. He said he had about two tons of it, and it was no use to him as it had been on his hands for some months and he wanted to get rid of it for 8100. I said, "All right, I will give you $100." The $12 I sent included the "cumshaw" for the clerk and cost of boat hire. On June 10th plaintiff said worth, I should like to have that money to-day I sent him a cheque for $100 by Mr. Kirkpatrick, who, however, could not find the plaintiff, and brought it back again. The next day I saw the plaintiff in the billiard room in the Hongkong Hotel, and I offered him the cheque. He said he wanted 54 cents a lb. I said he had never mentioned that amount before; the price agreed upon was $100. He went out and shortly afterwards came back with a bill for $250, and I said he had better refer the matter to Captain Murray.
M
Holds.
By Mr. Ewans-Defendant did say that in future the price would be $5 cents per lb. I was not very anxions to get this asbestos; I was anxious to get something, as I had no stuff of my own. I do not think I made more than $20 profit on the job, as I could not use the whole of the asbestos.
Mr. A. Willson, assistant to Mr. W. Brewer, said he was present when the price was agreed upon. Plaintiff said to defendant, "Give me $100 and take the stuff away.' I have no use for
it."
His Lordship said the plaintiff had not proved his case, and judgment would be for the plaintiff for $103 paid into court. The plaintiff would have to pay defendant's costs.
7th November.
CHUNG KAM CHUEN V. VILLA, LOPEZ, AND CO. AND R. J. HASTINGS.
The plaintiff sought to recover $408.30 for food supplied to passengers on the Ask on behalf of the defendants. Mr. Hastings (of Mr. V. H. Deacon's office) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Grist for the defendants.
Mr. Hastings said the plaintiff was the com- pradore on board the steamship Ask, which was chartered by the first defendants and made two or three voyages for them from Tainanfoo, Tamsui, Amoy, and Swatow. The second de fendant also shared in the transaction with the first defendants.
Mr. Grist, in answer to his Lordship said that only Villa, Lopez, and Co. entered into the charter party
Mr. Hastings, continuing, admitted this, but said that the second defendant shared in the transaction and made the agreement with the plaintiff to provide food for passengers No- thing was said about supplying food on the first voyage as there were no passengers, but on the arrival of the steamer at Tainanfoo, Mr. Hast- ings, who carried on business as a merchant there, made arrangements for the plaintiff to supply food to passengers during the subsequent
voyages,
63
In answer to his Lordship, Mr. Grist said his case was that the only persons responsible, if anybody, were Messrs. Villa, Lopez, and Co. Mr. Hastings was simply their agent at Tai- nanfoo. There was no doubt that the compra- dore supplied the chow, but he had charged 30 cents a head, and the defendants considered this excessive.
Mr. Hastings added that the claim was for the value of food supplied to 1,361 passenges at 30 cents each. The voyages varied in length, but 30 cents a head was a fair average. Messrs. Villa, Lopez, and Co. had entirely denied their liability, and on Wednesday afternoon they sent a set-off which claimed from the plaintiff "$453 passage money for 453 passengers collected by the plaintiff. This was quite a separate claim, and therefore should be heard at a later date.
Mr. Grist said the plaintiff claimed for food supplied to 1,361 passengers. The defendants sold 851 tickets, and it was the duty of the plaintiff to collect the fares from those pas. sengers who did not have tickets. If he collected the money from the surplus passengers there was a big sum of money in his hands; if he did not collect it he ought to have done so.
His Lordship-You have sprung this claim rather late.
Mr. Grist-It is not exactly my fault. His Lordship-That I do not know anything about, but it is rather a large order for a set off.
It was agreed to bring a cross-claim in re- spect of this amount, and his Lordship said he should stay execution in the present case when he gave judgment.
Plaintiff then gave evidence and said his wages were $120 a month and out of this sum he paid hus' assistants and supplied them with food. He received instructions from agents of the defendants at various ports to supply food for the passengers.
His Lordship-Why don't you sue all the agents and not pick out this particular one?
Mr. Hastings-It is not because he was an agent, but because he was connected with the charter party.
Plaintiff, continuing, said that when he applied to Messrs. Villa, Lopez, andCo. for the cost of food supplied they referred him to Mr. Hastings; when he applied to Mr. Hastings that gentleman said the matter did not concerz him, and referred him to Messrs. Villa, Lopez, and
Co.
Cross-examined by Mr. Grist, witness said that when he first saw Mr. Hastings he asked him to guarantee some rice which he had sent on board. The rice was worth about $44, and witness asked Mr. Hastings to buy it as he had not sufficient money.
Plaintiff's solicitor admitted that this sum was due to the defendants.
Witness, further cross-examined, denied that had nothing the second defendant told him to do with the food; he said he would allow witness 50 cents a head. Witness had been compradore on other coasting steamers, and he knew that from Hongkong to Swatow an allowance of 25 cents a head was allowed. He could not have supplied food for 15 cents a head, as there were delays during the voyages. He was surprised to know that on one steamer 15 cents a head was allowed from this port to Amoy.
In re-examination witness said there was no profit in feeding Chinamen at the rate of 30 cents a head for five days; there were ten meals in five days, and how could three cents a meal be sufficient?
Mr. Grist said the defence was that 1,361 passengers did not travel to the knowledge of The plaintiff's duty was to the defendants. collect tickets from all passengers on board without them, and he had only accounted for 908 passengers. The defendante submitted that 10 cents a head was sufficient from Tainanfoo to Amoy, 15 cents from Tainanfoo to Swatow, 15 cents from Tainanfoo to Hongkong, 10 cents Amoy to Swatow, and 15 cents from Amoy to Hongkong. These were the rates at which other compradores were being paid.
Mr R. J. Hastings, one of the defendants, said he was the agent for Villa, Lopez, and Co, at Tainanfoo. He entirely denied his liability, and also denied making arrangements to pay plaintiff 50 cents a head for food. When plaintiff saw him witness referred him to Villa,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.