:
228
to ten years, detention even the latter an extravagant punishment for crime that does not involve a high degree of moral guilt. It ap
appears there is still another appeal, by which
We may be permitted to hope that the prisoner may be enabled to fully establish his innocence. Until he does so, however, we cannot see sufficient ground for suppos- ing that the decision of the Rennes Court Martial was not in accordance with justice.
::
AAOHINA AND ARBITRATION.
slogus (Daily - Press, 14th September.)
Some years ago, when coercion in Ireland was the question of the day, a cartoon appeared in Punch representing a school- amster with rod in hand and a cheeky schoolboy, the latter prepared to maintain in argument that “force is no remedy." The proposal to refer the Kowshing claim to arbitration suggests the question whether the theory that force is no remedy is to be applied to China and whether all our diffl- culties with that country are to be referred to arbitration. Arbitration may perhaps be an acceptable form of settlement in the case of the Kowshing, which turns on a ques- of legal liability and not on the inten- tional wrong-doing or culpable neglect of the Chinese Government, though we imagine that had any other Govern mont had such a claim to present en behalf of its subjects it would have demanded a prompt settlement under threat of reprisals in case of non-compliance, and the case would never have been allowed drag along to the arbitration stage. However that may be, the British Government has now suggested arbitration, and presumably China will accept the suggestion. Thereafter we y expect to find China herself suggesting arbitration upon the claims pressed upon her: from time to time by the Foreign Powers, and sometimes the suggestion may pomibly proves little embarrassing, for China cannot be admitted to a full equality with the civilised Powers and must occasionally be subjected to coercion. Sustained coer- cion indeed is what she requires. But coer- cion is not a condition that can very well admit of arbitration, since it implies the overiding of certain abstract rights, and a court of law-would be deprived of its ac- customed landmarks in trying to arrive at an equitable decision. China's proposals for arbitration therefore will probably not command acceptance unless in special cases. SUEREME COURT.
September 11th.
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND Mr. Beyers to him. It bore interest at the rate of seven per cent. Upon that promissory note payments had been made from time to time on account of pincipal and interest, the last pay ment being one of $95.5 made on November❘ 19th, 1895. He produced an account showing the payments made from time to time. From this account it appeared that on 22nd February last $7,881.88 was still owing. Mr. Belilios also produced a promissory note for 837,936.87 made by Mr. Coxon in his favour and dated July 31st, 1893. Nothing had been paid on this note: There was no mention of interest but payment was due on demand,
Formal evidence was given by Mr. H. W. Looker.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION,
BEFORE THE HON. W. MEIGH GOODMAN
(ACTING CHIEF Justice).
BELILIOS V. COXON.
|
In this case the Hon. E. R. Belilios, C.M.G., sought to recover from George Lionel Stewart Coxon certain moneys due to him on promissory
cary E. Robinson (instructed by Messrs. Dea- son and Hastings) said he appeared on behalf *t the plaintiff in this suit. He believed the
fendant was not represented. Proof of ser
was on the file. He proposed simply to Mr. Balilios to prove the notes. The Hon. E. R. Belilios, on being sworn,
13
was a merchant carrying on business în Hongkong, Companion of the Order of St. Michael and St. George, and a member of the gislative Commeil. The note produced for 000 was in his favour and was made by Mr.
his
Loinel Stewart Coxon. It had an en-
ton the back to Mr.Beyers, who was agent, and it had a re-indorsement by
His Lordship gave judgment on the first note for $7,881-88 and interest at geven per cent. from the date of the writ till judgment, and eight per cent. hereafter; and on the se- at eight per cent. from the date of the writ till cond note judgment for $37,976-87 and interest judgment, and hereafter eight per cent., to- gether with costs.
18th September.
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUR W. MEIGH GOODMAN
(Acting Chief Justice).
OHEUK TAI TAI V. CHEUT SAN.
This was a claim for cattle forming part of Trung Kun Kin’s entste.
Mr. Melbourne (instructed by Mr. H. J. Holmes) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Ro. binson (instructed by Messrs. : Wilkinson' and Grist) for the defendant.
The petition recited that the plaintiff was a spinster residing at No. 50, Ship Street, and the defendant a dairy farmer carrying on Shek Tong Tsui. On the 9th of September, Tai Luk Lane,
1898, letters of administration of all and singu. lar the personal estate and effects of Tsang Kun Kui, late of Victoria, widow, farmer, deceased, were granted to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff The deceased at the time of her death was pos- aned the defendant as such administratrix. | sessed of or was entitled to certain cattle, and after the death of the deceased and the granting of letters of administration the defendant de- tained from the plaintiff the said cattle and the increase thereof, and the plaintiff had been unable to obtain possession of the cattle. The plaintiff claimed the return of the cattle or their value
business at 3 and 4
Mr. Robinson said the plaintiff had no money with which to pay the costs, and suggested that he should confer with his learned friend Mr. Melbourne for a few moments with a view to arriving at a settlement.
His Lordship said the question was whether the cattle did belong to the estate. The defence was that they did not belong to the deceased at all, but to the defendant. It seemed to him to be a case for compromise.
Mr. Robinson said they were in this position. The other side had no money to pay the costs. The plaintiff had no means really.”
[September 16, 1899.
In reply to the Official Receiver (Mr. Bruce Shepherd) the debtor said he was a property bro- ker and a business broker and came to Hongkong in 1862. Before then he was a godownkeeper. He first got into difficulties in 1894, when some people to whom he had lent money ran away, Then he had lent from $6,000 to $7,000 He first began to barrow money in 1893. He paid interest at the rate of from three to five per cent. per mensem. He expected to make one per cent. per mensem on it, so he charged from 45 to 60 per cent, per annum. During the last three years he had borrowed about $24,000, and in the same time he had paid into his bank $55,000 to $56,000, or about $18,000 per year, that was $1,500 per month-all money borrowed. Out of this money he had lent some to people who had run away, paid interest, household ex- penses, and some creditors. His household expenses were about $100 a month. His him. On promissory notes he owed about statement of affairs showed $45,000 owing by $14,500. The difference was accounted for by
interest $10,000 and more. The amount paid out included a great deal of interest. He did not keep books. He had not been to school. He knew how he stood with his creditors because he remembered. Changing year helped him to remember. He kept the new promissory notes with his creditors every
old promissory notes and thus he know his debts. He did not keep any ledger account. He did not write perfectly. When he paid off a creditor he kept the old promissory note; thus he kept his account. Sometimes for his remem- brance he kept a memo. on a piece of white Paper. He never went to school in India. He kong. He could not read perfectly; he could. was ten years of age when he came to Hong-
not understand. He did not go to people for their money; they brought it to him because they knew he was doing the business. Most of them were Government servants. He lost about cent interest. Sergeant Tom Ford, Police $30,000 for them. They charged him 36 per Sergeant, lent him $1,894 at 36 per cent. per annam. The Government lenders were mostly in the police; none were in higher offices. The amount he had paid into the bank did not include his life for $3,000, and mortgaged the policy to his winnings on lottery tickets. He had insured A. G. Stokes, to whom he owed $3,000. His wife was not wealthy. She was as poor as he
was.
He give her $8 a month as pocket ex- penses, She lived in a different house from him. He had not given her jewellery for, the past four years. She was old and did not care for jewellery. There had been a meet- ing of his creditors, who had agreed to accept 50 per cent. if he paid $50 per month. He would pay it out of his brokerage obtained in business. His relations would assist him. He sold some of the jewellery he got from Falconer and Co., and he paid $5,000 to Falconer and Co. The rest of the jewellery he pawned. He still owed them $4,000, and the rest was interest. He had never been a bank- rupt before or made a composition with his creditors. He was against gambling.
On being further examined by Mr. Gedge, who represented the creditors, the debtor said be first commenced obtaining jewellery from Fal- coners in December, 1895, when he bought $15 worth. He also bought goods at different times in 1896, 1897, and 1898 Among these goods was a hunting watch, which he pawned to pay his creditors. When he bought the watch he told Falconer and Co. that he was in diff-
His Lordship thought this was one of those cases in which there was a doubt, and it seemed to him that a small addition to the means of the plaintiff and the defendant to be left in posses sion of some of the cattle would be the best solution. If no arrangement could be come to they must fight the question as to the owner-culties, and they told him that his difficulties ship of the eattle.
It transpired that the defendant was the adopted son of the deceased and the plaintiff
the sister of the deceased.
It was ultimately agreed on behalf of the defendant to return four of the cattle sad to pay $75 towards the plaintiff's costs, this offer being accepted.
14th September.
IN BANKRUPToy JurisdictTION.
BEFORE HIS HONOUr W. Meigh Goon- MAN (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE).
RB FUCKEERA MAHOMED.
had nothing to do with them. He told them a long time before he bought the watch that he was in difficulties, yet they trusted him. He pawned a diamond ring and some diamond ear- rings for $115 in order to pay his creditors. He pawned some jewellery in January and February of this year. According to his reckoning he had paid Falconer and Co. about $5,600. The last time he bought from Falcouer and Co. was in January, 1899. He became insolvent in 1894, the money he owed being greater than what people owed him.
The public examination was closed:
The Manila Times says its statement that the U.S.8. Helena would bare to come Hongkong to have her shaft repaired was based
examination.
This debtor again came up for bis public on wrong information. The work has been
done at the Cavite slip.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.