"
July 20, 1901.]
UNITED ASBESTOS ORIENTAL
AGENCY, LD.
The following is the report and statement of accounts for presentation to the shareholders at the fifth ordinary annual meeting to be held at the offices of Messrs. Dodwell & Co., Ld., Queen's Buildings, on Monday, 29th July, at 3 p.m. :-
ACCOUNTS.
The balance at the credit of profit and loss account, after writing off $1,150 for deprecia- tion and including $584.34 brought forward from last year, is $15,631.80, which it is pro- posed to appropriate as follows
To place to reserve fund
SI
pay a dividend of 15 per cent. on ordinary shares
general managers' remunera-
$3,000.00
5,940.00
tion
+44
2,000.00
33
pay a further dividend of 5
per cent. on ordinary shares
1,930,00
"
pay $19.80 per share on 100 founders' shares
1,980.00
731.80
$15,631.80
,, carry forward to new account
The accounts
AUDITOR.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE RÉPORT.
The Hon. C. P. CHATER seconded, and the proposal was carried unanimously,
.73
The notice convening the meeting and the | had to be closed. 'In June, 1899, Mr. A. F. resolutions concerned having been read, the Ramsey, chief engineer on one of the Douglas CHAIRMAN said:-Gentlemen, as you are aware, steamers, nominally opened in Wanchai a busi- the object of this meeting is to confirm or other- ness precisely similar to that carried on by wise the special resolutions which were passed at Collins, and also had a stall or portion of the an extraordinary general meeting held a fort- hall in the Hongkong Hotel at his disposal for night ago. I therefore propose that the resolu- the exhibition of bicycles and bicycle acces. tions which you have just heard read by the sories. The business was opened in the first_ secretary be now confirmed.
instance in the name of A. F. Ramsey, but as chief engineer of a steamer Mr. Ramsey was only infrequently in Hongkong, and then only for a day or two. It would be proved that Gibson himself made the necessary arrange- ments for the hire of a portion of the hall of the Hongkong Hotel, that it was either by himself or in his name that the rent for that stall was paid, and that the only business carried on was that of a bicycle-dealer, nominally in the name of A. F. Ramsey. In September of 1899 Gibson went to England for the purpose, it would be proved, of making arrangements on behalf of A. F. Ramsey for the supply of Ramsey & Company with bicycles and bicycle accessories. Bills of lading would be produced of goods shipped from England and America. The bill of lading for one set of goods coming from America was signed "Ramsey & Co." by the defendant, who took delivery of the goods
The CHAIRMAN then said:-Work at the mill will be resumed on Monday next, and shortly after the Supreme Court has sanctioned the reconstruction scheme, applications for the new issue of capital will be invited, due notice being given.. New share certificates will then he exchanged for the old scrip at present held by shareholders. That is everything, gentlemen.
.SUPREME COURT.
Monday, 15th July,
IN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION.
now presented have been BEFORE HIS HONOUR A. G. WISE (ACTING and paid for them. In April, 1900, the defen- audited by Mr. W. H. Potts, who, being eligible, offers himself for re-election.
DODWELL & Co., LTD.,
'General Managers.
Hongkong, 9th July, 1901.
BALANCE-SHEET. 31st May, 1901.
LIABILITIES.
To capital 9,900 ordinary sharos
of $10, of which $4 per share & C. paid
100 founders' shares of $10
fully paid
To bills payable
To sundry creditors
To unclaimed dividends..
To reserve fund
39,600.00
1,000.00
To profit and loss account balance...
C.
CHIEF JUSTICE).
COLLINS v. GIBSON, —ACTION FOR ALLEGED
BRE CH OF AGREEMENT.
The plaintiff was Robert Aloycins Collins, cycle-repairer and manufacturer 11. D'Aguilar Street, and the defendant Emerson Fitzgerald Gibson, cycle-dealer, 18. D'Aguilar Street. The plaintiff's claim was $2,000 damages for breach by the defendant of an agreement with the plaintiff, dated 2nd June, whereby the defendant agreed (inter alia) that he would not 40,600.00 at any time thereafter, either by himself or in 14,282.35 connection with any other person or persons, 20,965.28
carry on the business of cycle-repairer or 150,00
manufacturer in Hongkong, Macao and Canton. 2,000.00 15,031,80
so long as the plaintiff or his partner or partners, or his or their executors, administra $93,629.13 tors or assignees should carry on such business in Hongkong. The plaintiff also claimed an injunction to restrain the defendant from further committing a breach of such agreement by continuing to carry on such business in the 4.000.00 colony of Hongkong.
ASSETS.
$
By value of launch Gladiator as
per last account
Less written off
$ C. 5,000.00 1,000.00
By value of furniture and fittings
as por last account
Less written off
300.00 150.00
By value of material on hand
By sundry debtors
By cash in bank
By cash in hands of Genoral Managers
By unexpired portion of insurance policies
PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, 31st May, 1901.
To trade expenses, salarios, commissions,
launch working, ront, advertising
To auditor's fee
To depreciation for year ending 31st May... To balance carried to new account
By balance from last account By profit on sales
By transfer fees
By interest
---
C.
150.00 46,247.81 231 54 30,565.52 12,193.13 241.43
$ C. 40,319.88 50.00 1,150.00 15,631.80
$57,151.68
$ C.
42.00
157.89
857,151.68
Mr. J. J. Francis, K.C. (instructed by Mr C. D. Wilkinson), appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. E. Robinson, barrister-at-law (instructed by Mr. H. Hursthouse) for the defendant.
Mr. Francis read the petition in the suit. and then proceeded to open the case. He said the issue that would have to be decided by his Lordship was whether there had been any $93,629.43 breach of covenant by the defendant whether the defendant had or had not since June, 1998, been carrying on the business of cycle-dealer, repairer or manufacturer in Hongkong. The writ in the suit was issued in November last, the petition was filed in February of this year, and the answer in March. The defendant had for some time prior to the date of sale been carrying on the business of cycle-dealer and agent in D'Aguilar Street in the present premises occupied by tho plaintiff. He was a 564.34 man possessing great knowledge of the cycle 56,367.45 trade, and had got together a fair business for bimself. On the 2nd June, 1898, he sold that business to the plaintiff for the sum of $1,000, and undertook, as set out in the petition, that he would not, either himself or in concert with cycle business in Hongkong, Macao, or Canton, any other person or persons, carry on any such
while the plaintiff or his partner or partners. or his or their administrators or assignees, continued to carry on business in Hongkong. Very shortly after the sale the defendant went to Shanghai, and was there for half a year, when he come back here. It was believed that the defendant was connected with a cycle business in Shanghai-in some partnership or association there-and indirectly that may have had some bearing on his subsequent conduct down here. On his return from Shanghai Gibson became manager of a shop or small store opened for the sale of acetylene gas-lamps. In regard to that concern little or nothing was known, but it was believed to be some Chinese organisation, mainly kept up by Gibson. The business soon afterwards became a failure, and
HONGKONG COTTON SPINNING, WEAVING, And Dyeing CO., LIMITED.
An extraordinary general meeting of the shareholders in the above company was held on the 13th inst. in the offices of the general managers, Messrs. Jardine, Matheson & Co., 4, Pedder Street, to confirm the resolutions adopted at an extraordinary general meeting held on Thursday, 27th ult. The Hon. J. J. Bell Irving occupied the chair, and there were also present the Hon. C. P. Chater, C.M.G., and Mr. A. Haupt (consulting committee), and Messrs. C. W. Dickson, K. McK. Ross, A. Shaw (manager), V. H Deacon, A. Brook Smith (secretary), Ho Fook, Ab Hoe, On Lun, Ho Kom Tong, Yuen Hop, and Ho Ya Shang,
|
|
dant returned to the colony, and very shortly afterwards the stall in the hall of the Hongkong Hotel was given up. In June of the same year the name of the firm was changed from A. F. Ramsey to Ramsay & Company, and the business was removed from Wanchai to No. 18, D'Aguilar Street, almost immediately opposite the premises occupied by the plaintiff. The defendant, it would be shown from a letter or letters written directly in connection with the business of Ramsey & Company, was signing for the firm without any qualification whatever, and from the evidence of a witness in the snit it would be proved that Gibson had a direct interest of two-thirds in the business.
Evidence was then led. Robert Aloycius Collins, the plaintiff, deposed as to his pur chasing his present business from the defendant, and the agreement then entered into by the latter not to engage in the cycle trado whilst the plaintiff carried on such business in Hong- kong. The breach of that agreement by the defendant had interfered with the plaintiff's business to the extent of at least two or three hundred dollars a month.
By Mr. Robinson-Plaintiff was not a West Indian by origin. He served his timo as an apprentice in a mechanical works in India. When he first arrived in Hongkong he was a warder in Victoria Gaol at a salary of $10 per month. When he left that occupation at the end of June, 1897, his salary was double that figure. Plaintiff then joined Kinghorn & Macdonald, and received a monthly salary of eighty or ninety dollars. He took up the business of a cycle-dealer when he left King- horn & Macdonald. The capital of that business amounted to about $1,500, and this sum he had obtained in advances from various people.
Mr. Francis contested the relevancy of question by Mr. Robinson as to the naines of these people, but his Lordship did not sustain the objection.
Plaintiff, continuing, said Mrs. Caroll advanced him about $800, and he also borrowed money from Ruttonjee & Company. In addi- tion to that, he did business on credit with American suppliers. No one else, however, had advanced him money. Plaintiff had repaid the loan from Mrs. Caroll, with interest, but had
people. since borrowed again from her, and from other
Mr. Robinson---How much do you owe other people?
Mr. Francis-1 submit, my Lord, this is wholly irrelevant. It is going too far altogether.
His Lordship sustained the objection. Mr. Robinson then asked the plaintiff the value of the stock-in-trade, but Mr. Francis again objected, and the question was overruled by his Lordship, who remarked-The only point for me to decide is whether there has or has not been a breach of covenant.
Replying to further questions by Mr. Robinson, plaintiff said he did not object to the defendant engaging in the acetylene lamp business, and had himself purchased such lamps from the defendant. It was the case that when the defendant came back from Shanghai in
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.