July 1, 1901.]
|
up his rifle, and looking up through a hole that had been knocked in the roof, and through which poles were thrust. saw 80 me four or five men on the top of the house. The complainant fired his rifle, and two of the men, apparently sliding down the poles into the complainant's house, bolted through the front door and escaped. The complainant had gone for the police, and at twenty minutes past nine
ergeant Kent, in charge of a party, arrived. Į They searched the house, and on the roof the complainant found a chopper, which he handed over to a Chinese constable. The complainant, Mr. Pollock explained, did not profess to be able to identify any of the robbers, but evidence would be brought forward by the prosecution to show that the defendant was connected with the chopper. One of the Crown witnesses was a blacksmith carrying on business in Kowloon, and he would tell the jury that he sold the chopper to the defendant on 1 th May- the night of the attempted robbery - at six or seven o'clock, some two or three has before the affair took place. The defendant hid denied i that he actually bought the chopper, but he appeared on his own showing to have been in the shop when it was purcha. ed. The jury would also have to consider the fact that when he was arrested-two days after the attempted larceny-the defendant was wearing a pair of trousers which had stain of blood upon them. The stains were undoubtedly those of blood, but the Governme Analyst was unable to say whether the blood a recent or whether it was human. One point he had omitted to mention, said the Attorney-feneral, was that when the complainant fir his rifle one of the robbers fell from the roof in attempt. ing to make his escape, and sustained in juries from which he ultimately died. possible that the blood on the defendant's trousers might have been caused by his attempt. ing to rescue the injured man, who, although
It was
unable to move, was found some dis ance from the house.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
་་
An exemplification of the probate and sealed with the seal of this Court in its Probate Jurisdiction on the 7th August, 1900, and probate duty was paid on property of the estate in this colony, consisting of shares in various companies of the total value of 8629,367,70.
4
Since this payment was made, it has been ascertained that, in addition to these shares, the testator was entitled to the undermentioned parcels of shares, namely:-
↑
(1.) A parcel of 767 shares in the Hong- kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, which were on the London Register of the Corporation and the scrip or share cer- į tificates which were, at the date of his death, in the possession and under the control of the Corporation in London, subject to a lien or charge in fav.ur of the Corporation amounting to £975, 59, 6d.
and
;
(2) A parcel of 705 shares in the same Corporation which were on the Shanghai Register of the Corporation and were, at the date of his death. in the possession and under the control of the Corporation at Shanghai, subject to a lien or charge in favour of the Corporation amounting to Taels 252,412.72 (Shanghai sycee). "The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation was incorporated in Hongkong by Ordinance No. 5 of 1866 and exists and is gov erned by the provisions of that Ordinance and and of certain later Ordinance; extending and amending the Original Ordinance of Incorpora-
of the Deed of Settlement mentioned therein
tion.
The Head Office of the Corporation is in Hongkong, and the business of the Corporation is managed and controlled by a Court of Direc- tors in Hongkong. A Register of Shareholders is kept in Hongkong a separate volum: being opened and kept for Hongkong shareholders, for English shareholders, for Shanghai share. bolders and for 'aleutta shareholders respec-
"
After hearing the Attorney-General, his Lord.tively. ship, addressing the jury, said he thought the Separate registers have for many years case was altogether too weak to obefore past been opened and kept by the Corpora them. There might be grave suspiciou against tion in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta, the defendant, but that was not enough, and | for shareholders in England. in China, he would ask them to return a verdict of not and in India respectively. It appears that so guilty.
far back as the 4th November, 1865, that is | some time before the date of the Ordinance of Incorporation and of the Deed of Settlement— the managers and agents of the Corporation at these places were empowered by the Court of Directors to sign scrips for shares at their re- spective branches or agencies On the 19th December, 1867, the Court of Directors further authorised the special agent of the Corporation
The jury were unanimous in finding the pri. soner not guilty, and be was discharged. This brought the Sessions to a close
Tuesday, 25th June.
IN ORIGINAL JURIS ICTION.
1
I
1
1
·
15
In this state of facts the following question is raised for the decision of the Court:- Whether the said 1,472 shares or any of them are property which is liable to the payment of probate duty in Hongkong, under the provisions of Ordinances No. 16 of 1886 and No. 13 of 1894, or not?
i
¡
"It is obvious that the answer to this question depends upon the answer to be made to another question, namely: Whether the shares in question were lawfully and properly transferred and borne on the local Registers in London and at Shanghai? The answer to this question is in its turn dependent on the answer to the question whether the Corporation is empowered by the forms of its Ordinances or of its Deed of Settlement toestablish local Registers of Shareholders in London and at Shanghai, and to provide for the transfer and holding of shares on those Registers as valid and effectual in themselves without reference to the Register of Shareholders in Hongkong. It is clear th ta judicial determination of this question must be a matter of considerable importance to the Corpora tion, and therefore I was careful to inquire at the hearing as to the position of the Corporation in respect of these proceedings. I was informed that, as attorney for the defendant, the Corpora- tion was fully cognisant of the proceedings.
It is admitted in the special case that the Ordinances of the Corporation and its Deed of Settlement contain no express authority enabling the Corporation to establish the local Registers. We must therefore examine the Ordinances and Ded of Settlement to see whether any general or implied authority to that effect is The Ordinances do not contain any provisions for conferred by them or either of them. regulating the management of the affairs of the Corporation; all such matters are expressly left to be dealt with by the Deed of Settlement. The keeping of Registers of Shareholders is clearly one of such matter; it remains therefore to consider what are the provisions of the Deed of Settlement relating to this subject.
By the proviso to Section 4 of the Ordinance of Incorporation-as repealed and re-enacted in somewhat wider terms by Ordinance No. 29 of 1889-power is given to the Corporation, with the consent of the Commissioners, for executing the Office of Lord High Treasurer to establish Branch Banks or Agencies at any place out of the Colony in couformity with the law of such place.
**The principal enactment relating to the Deed ¦ of Settlement is Section 10 of the Ordinance of Incorporation. By this Section it is enacted that a Deed of Settlement was to be executed within a certain time by certain subscribers, and that the Deed was to contain provisions for
BEFORE HIS HONOUR SIR JOHN CARRING-in London to got a dup icate seal of the Cor-effectuating the following object amongst
TON, KT., C M.G. (CHIEF JUSTICE).
PROBATE OF A
WILL-ATTORNEY-GENERAL
V. JACQUES.
|
poration made and to affix that seal to shares on. or to be put on, the London Register.
Shares held in the above-mentioned coun-
tries have been habitually transferred on the This was a special case, and was heard before local Registers and share certificates have been his Lordship on the 10th inst. It was called issued in London, at Shanghai, and at Calcutta by consent of parties to decide the liability or to the transferees, without any reference to the not of certain shares belonging to the estate of Court of Directors or to the Chief Manager in Joseph Jacques, deceased, not on the Register of Hougkong. The Registers kept in Hong- the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank at Hongkong for shareholders resident in the said kong, to be charged probate duty in this countries are merely transcripts of the local colony. The Attorney-General was
the Registers kept in London, at Shanghai, and plaintiff, and Sarah Jacques, executrix of the at Calcutta respectively, all transfers of shares will of her husband, Joseph Jacques, deceased,¦ being reported to Hongkong periodically by was the defendant. The judgment of his the local managers Lordship was as follows:-
In this case the parties filed a memorandum of agreement under Section 88 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the purpose of obtaining the finding of the Court upon a question of law, which is stated in a special case annexed to the memorandum. By the memorandum it is agreed that if the finding of the Court is in the affirmative of the question submitted to it, the defendant is to pay to the Colonial Treasurer certain prolate duty in respect of the estate of her testator, while if the finding is in the negative the plaintiff is to withdraw his claim for payment of that probate duty.
|
¦
1
|
others, namely, for the management of the affairs of the Company. The Deed Was executed on the 20th July, 1867, nearly a year after the coming into force of the Ordinance of Incorporation, and was approved by the Governor.
*
The curlier Articles of the Deed make pro- vision with respect to the Constitution of the Company, the seal and its uses, the business of the Company, the place of business, the capital of the Company, and shares in the Com pany. Articles 30 to 33 make provision with regard to Certificates of Shares. By Article 30 it is provided that 'on demand made by the registered holder of any share, the Court shall deliver to him a certificate of the ownership of the share, aud such certificate shall have the seal affixed thereto, and shall specify the share to which he is entitled and
may be in the form prescribed in the first schedule to the Deed.' According to this form a share certicate is issued under the seal of the
In these circumstances the plaintiff as representing the Crown claims from the defendant as executrix of the testator payment of probate duty in Hongkong on the above. mentioned 1.479 shares, on the ground that they, are sitnate within the Probate Jurisdiction of this Court and therefore form part of the estate and effects of the testator upon which probate, Corporation. duty ought to be paid in this Colony. The ¦ By Articlo 49 it is declared that, ‘subject to defendant, on the other hand, resists payment - the provisions of the Deed, any shareholder may of the proba o duty so claimed on the ground, sell and transfer all or any of his shares to any that the shares in question are not property other persons approved by the Court. locally situate in Hongkong, but are property A Register of Transfers, 'to be kept under situats in England and within the jurisdiction | the superintendence of the Court,' is provided of the Supreme Court at Shanghai respectively. fur by Articles 54 to 5ti.
· The defendant admits that there is no express authority in the Ordiuauces constitut- The testator died in England on the 23rding and affecting the Corporation or in the January, 1900, and probate of his will was Corporation Deed of Settlement for the opening granted by the High Court of Justice Probate of the Registers in London, at Shangbai, and, Division to the defendant on the 2nd May. at Calentia The Corporation is not subject 1900.
to the provisions of the Companies' Ordinances.
The facts upon which the question arisos are set forth in the special case, and may be shortly stated as follows:
**
1
**
Article 57 is in the following terms :-' A book to be called The Register of Share- holders" shall be provided and kept under the superintendenco of the Court, and therein shall, from time to time, be fairly and distinctly entered the names and addresses of the several shareholders, and the number of
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.