Page
April 7, 1906.3
This was an application by Mr. G. H. Wake- man, Official Receiver, that the sum of $7,247. the net proceeds of certain goods stored in the name of the debtors, form part of the estate of the debtor..
Mr. H. W. Looker (of Mossra. Dascon, Looker and Deacon) opposed the "pplication on behalf of the Yan On Fire Insurance Co.
|
In delivering his decision, his Lordship said the Yan On Insurance Co. lent to the Hing Sing Cheong firm a certain sum of money on the security of a godown warrant given by the Hop Yick Godown in respect of 300 sheets of tin. Money was also lent on the security of certain bags of pepper, and entries were made in the books of the Godown Co. of the pledge. Notwithstanding the existenc) of such pledge the Godown Co. allowed the firm to 10ceive some of the tin and pepper, but received from the firm some of her goods without the knowledge of the Yan On Co. Au entry was made in the books of the godown that the other goods were held in salstitution of the original goods pledged. The Yan On remained 1 satisfied, but did not receive a fresh godown warrant. The frust-e in bankruptcy has sold these substituted goods in the bankruptcy of the Hing Sing Cheong firm and the Yan On claims the proceeds. This claim is resisted by the trustee on the ground that the Yau On has not got the gedown warrant, and he contends that without it the pledge is incomplete. The point raised is really this: Is a godown warrant so indisputable a document of title hat the recognition of the substituted pledge in the books of the Godown Co. is insufficient to establish the title of the Yan On? It seems that on the authority of Young v. Lambert. 22 L. T. 499, such a recog- nition in the books would be sufficient if thers is no document of title. But is it good if there is a document of title such as a godown warrant? If the trustee's conteution were sound, that the godown warrant is indisputable, this would be putting the godown warrant on the same level as a bill of lading. But there is abundance of authority to show that it is not entitled to be so treated (see new Encyclopædia; dock warrant and authorities therein cited). therefore of opinion that the Yan On Co. is entitled to the proceeds of the sales of the sub- stituted goods and cosis.
ANOTHER PARTNERSHIP CASE.
I am
The Lai Iling Arm ex parte Ma Leung-ko. This was the trial of an issue to determine whether Woug Ka-cheung was, at the presenta tion of a petition in bankruptcy, a partner in the Lai Hing firm.
f
Mr. E. H. Sharp, K.C., instructed by Mr. G. K. Hall Brutton (of Messrs. Brutton, Hett and Goldring), appeared for the Official Receiver, and Mr. M. W. Slade, instructed by Mr. R. A. Harding, represented Wong Ka-cheang.
The case was heard before the following jary-Messrs. H. M. Kendall, G. Koenig, A. E. Slaney, G. H. Schoenemann, D. H. Silas, J. C. Gow and O. H. Schneider.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
Thursday, April 5th.
257
of their own particular deposits. A few of them were able to obtain payment; most of suggested by the defence that Wong Ka cheung Mr. Sharp, continuing, said it was also them were not. They would tell the court that they were put off by promises mainly made by 1893. "Being a partner in one firm did not was a partuer in a sɩmshiu firm at Canton in Wong Ka-cheung, to whom they looked because he was the most sub-fantial person in the bank. they put it, this was a c›uspiracy between Wong revent his being a partner in the other. As Chinese new year fl on the 4th February. | Ka-cheung, Ma Fat-ting an l the other partuers On the 9th the creditors were summoned to a in this bank to deny Wong K-chenng's part- creditors' meeting. Three partners of the nership and so save his property to the defrand bank presided at that Ka-choung,
meeting-Wong | of the creditors. It was the old story; another Ma Fat-ting and anolber, of the innumerable cases that came before this and there were about 20 or 30 creditors | Court showing the necessi y for some record of present. The first partner to address Chinese partnerships. So long as business the meeting was Ma Fa-ting. He told the prospered there were plenty of partners. If it oreditors the bank was unable to collect its outstandings and asked for time. He also the braut doubtless he was recompensed for it, went wrong, somebody was put forward to beir produced a draft agreement intended for the and doubtless bis loss was shared by the others, creditors' signatures in which they were to but the real principal partner dsually dis- consent to wait nine months for half their appeared. Hero Ma Fat-ting had been put debt and eighteen months for the bilauce. forward in this way, but when the jury had They refused to do this, whereupon Wong Ka-heard the evidence they would have no doubt cheung got up and addressed them. He that Wong Ka-cheung was a partner in the repeated the arguments of the first speaker bank at the time of the bankruptcy. and proposed to reduce the time to six months and twelve months. The bank's books were
The case was adjourned. then referred to. They appeared to have shown outstanding assets of about $1,900,000 aud liabilities of about $1,700,000, showing a balance in the bauk's favour if the amonot could be collected of two lakhs of dollars. Couusel would prove that Wong Ka-cheung said "We three (that Was himself and the other two partners) are substantial—or some word equivalent in Chinese-and if any of these debts are bad we will make up the de- ficiency; if the bank carnot pay you we will." At the end of the speech the other partners expressed their agreement with Wong Ka. cheung's proposal, and the oreditors said they would fall in with the proposed arrangements, relying on Wong Ka-cheung, whom they regarded as the substantial person. Finally. they all signed the agreement in its modified form. About two months after that meeting a petition in bankruptcy was filed by a creditor, and Wong Ka-cheung's property in Chion was attached. He petitioned the Viceroy and district magistrate to get it released, telling them that he had been living for many years in retirement in China, Further he told the Viceroy that all partnerships must be registered here.
Mr. Sharp, after reading affidavits filed in the action, informed the jury the question they would have to answer was whether Wong Ka cheung was a partner in the Lai Hing Bank at the time of its bankruptcy. The Lai Hing firm appeared to have been established scme- where about 1872 and to have carried on business for a good many years prosperously. He would show that Wong Ka-cheung had been one of the managing partners; he thought the evidence would prove that he was really the principal partner for many years. The evidence would be substantially directed to the last one or two years before the bankruptcy, because the real point to consider was whether Wong Ka- cheung was a partner when the firm became bankrupt. Shortly before last Chinese new year it became generally known that the Lai Hing bank was in fiancial difficulties; as the jury would no doubt remember, trouble of the kind Was rather general in the Chinage mercantile community at that time. The bank held on deposit a large amount of money belonging to Chinese merchants, and these men, when the report gol abroad that the bank was in difficulties, naturally went there to learn the real state of affairs. He would. Gill several who had visited the bank and could say that they saw Wong Ka-cheung and Ma Fat- ting, who was also a partner, and discussed with them the position of the bank and the question
Mr. Slade-I don't know whether my friend will prove the Chinese documents.
Mr. Sharp-I shall prove that Wong Ka- chaung has made affidavits in this Court, one as recently as July, 1904-six years after he alleges he retired from the bank-stating that he was the managing partner of the Lai Hing Bank.
Continuing, Counsel said these affidavits were made in other actions, and wou'd alone suffice for the Official Receiver's case. But he had much more evidence; he would prove that Chinese merchauts were induced to do business and deposit money with this biok by Wong Ka-cheung's statement that he was a partner long after the period he alleged he finally retired from the bank. He would also prove that up to the last Wong Ka cheung was in frequent, practically in constant, attendance at the bank as a partner, and that the bank's receipts were indiscrimicately chopped with Wong Ka-cheung's chop or the bank chop. The defence apparently was that Wong Ka- cheung left the firm in 18:8, nearly eight years ago, but the evidence in the Official Receiver's case dealt with more recent times entirely, and showed that for the last two or three years Wong Ka-cheung was a partner. The business of the Lai Hing was transferred at that time by the old partners to a syndicate called the Kwong Tai Tong. An advertisement in a Chinese paper at the time gave the names of those who gave up their shares but Wong Ka. cheung's name was not comprised in the list.
Mr. Slade--Do you suggest that that is a complete list of the partners?
|
Mr. Sharp-Yes, a complete list. His Lordship--Do you put your case, then, on the ground of a holding out ?
Mr. Sharp-No, my Lord. Holding out is the liability a mau incu s by acting in such a way that people may reasonably suppose he is a partner. We say the man said himself he was a partner during that period of two years, and it is the best evidence of actual partnership.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE Mr. A. G. W188 (PUISNE JUDGE).
A DISCREPANCY.
W. Shewan aud Co., sned the Exe Loong firm to r cover the sum of $172 due on a promissory
note.
Mr. Oito Kong Sing appeared for the plain- tiff, and Mr. E. J. Grist (of Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist), for the defendants.
Mr. Grist snid it seemed there had been a cou- iderable number of transactions between the plaintiff and the defendant, and a considerable number of promissory notes had been given by the defendant to the plaintiff.
His Lordship-Didn't this case come on in another shape or form before?
Mr. Grist-Yes, it came before your Lordship before in the form of a claim for goods sold and delivered. I am quite sure if they had set up on the promissory note I would have been entitled to judgment. It would take a considerable amount of time if we went all through the accounts before your Lordship to seo where the discrepancy occurs. We say we have paid the amount in full, so it seems to me. a matter entirely of account and I submit it would save a considerable amount of time if your Lordship would refer it.
His Lordship-Whom are you going to refer it to?
|
Mr. Grist-I would suggest the Court shroff. The notes are all in Chinese.
Mr. Kong Sing said his client was quite agreeable. He said that the money was owing,
and would produce his books.
His Lordship-Very well, the matter will be referred to the shroff and the case adjourned
ine die.
FIRE IN DES VOEUX ROAD.
under Chief Inspector Baker, were called out to Early on April 4th the Fire Brigade,
medicine shop at 184, Des Voeux Road. an outbreak of fire at the Wing Shon Wo Originating in the drying room, the flames had quickly spread to the neighbouring medicine shop, to save which the brigade directed their attention. Unfortunately they were handicapped by the insufficiency of the water supply, and had to rely on what they could obtain from the conflagration was extinguished, but not before fire-float and the engine. Eventually the damage, estimated at $25,000 had been done to both shops. Both are insured for a total of $65,000.
The Chinese Board of Panishment in conse-. quence of the Edict issued last year abolishing bambooing and substituting fines, directed each of the provinces to contribute up to Tis. 100 ≈ month from each of the principal districts out of the fines, which money would be used to make a monthly allowance to all the members of the Board. This money having now been sent up, the President's allowance is fixed at Tls. 160, the vice-President's at Tis. 120 and the sub- (ordinates' from Tls. 20 to Tle 60. Evidently
some “reforms” are popular.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.