Page
September 8, 1906.]
mentioned. In my mind the estate could be made solvent in two years.
Mr. Deacon suggested that his client, Mr. Ho Tung, should be appointed to enquire into debtor's affairs. He was an able man and would get through the work quickly,
Debtor objected to Mr. Ho Tung. He would agres to Mr. Chau Hon-king being appointed.
His Lordship-Why shouldn't Mr. Chan Hon-king and Mr. Ho Tung together look into his affairs?
Mr. Descou-I am afraid there is rather an impa 88. My client says the property could not be managed now as things are to far gone.
His Lordship-Well, things must take their course. It is no use closing the examination now, so I will adjourn it for a week.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE ME A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGE).
A SUB-CONTRACTOR'S CLAIM.
Lam Tak-yee sued the Tung Shang Co., Chung Yu-yee and others to recover the sum of $579.30, balance due for work done.
Mr. F. C. Barlow (of Messrs. Goldring and Barlow) appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Č. F. Dixon (of Mr. John Hastings' office) for the first and second defendants.
The other two defendants who appeared admitted the claims against them and judgment was entered for plaintiff.
Mr. Barlow said the defendant Tung Yu-yee obtained a contract from the Government for the planting of certain trees. He let the contract to several sub-contractors, including the Tung Shang Company, to do portions of the work. The plaintiff, as a sub-contractor, claimed the amount for which he sued.
Mr. Dixon objected to plaintiff suing by himself, Chung Pak-yee, his partner, who sublet the work bad absconded. The plaintiff alone could not maintain the action, He had either to join his co-contractor with him, or make him a defendant.
His Lordship-Why don't you refer to the Code instead of the White Book ? Mr. Dixon-This is Lindley.
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
HONGKONG CONTRABAND CASE
IMPRISONED SEAMEN RECOVER WAGES.
Mr. Justice Lawrence in the King's Beach Division has given judgment in Caine and others v. the Palace Shipping Co." for the plaintiff seamen, writes our London representa- tive.
They were nine men of thes.s. Franklyn, who were imprisoned at, Hongkong for refusing to go to Japan because their cargo was coal (con- trabaud). They claimed wages from the time they left Hongkong until they reached England. They also claimed damages for malicious pro- secution,
Mr. Justice Lawrence in giving judgment mentioned that the men had agreed to serve for three years in latitudes that included Japan They sailed from Glasgow, taking Welsh coal on board at Cardiff, and at Hongkong these men learned that they were to go to Sasebo, His Lordship proceeded : They considered this dangerous, and refused. They were taken before the Harbour Master, a Lieutenant in the Royal Navy, who appears to have been if I may say so. the resident magistrate; and he committed them for seventy days solitary confinement, on the charge of impeding the navigation of the ship, under one of the sections of the Merchant Shipping Act. The men were marched, handcuffed, through the
seventy days. In streets to the prison, where they did their the meantime, the vessel was taken to Sasebo by a crew of Chinamen. The men, on their release, were sent home as distressed
seamen, and this action was brought to recover the
from due wages the time they left Hongkong to the time they arrived in this country. The points taken by the defence were that the men were bound by their article to go to Sasebo, if required; that they had broken their contract; that they were legally convicted and snt to prison and that the claim for malicious prosecution could not be sustained because the proceedings did not terminate in the men's favour. That is a good objection and that part of the claim was abandoned at the trial. Defendants also pleaded
His Lordship-That won't do. We have that the men's services came to an end upon the got a law of our own,
Mr. Barlow-It appears to me that now this man is trading by himself; he is no longer & firm. His partner's interest in the
firm must have ceased when he absconded.
His Lordship-Has there been a dissolution of partnership?
Mr. Barlow-The other man by absconding has certainly dissolved the partnership.
His Lordship-It seems to me quite possible that the plaintiff night have sued the firm name. It is clear now the other man must be added as plaintiff.
Mr. Barlow-This contract was not entered into by these two men as a firm.
His Lordship-But the plaintiff said this man was a partner in the contract.
Mr. Barlow-Supposing they were partners in the contract, the partnership has now ceased.
His Lordship-It has not. Where is the
dissolution? You cannot sue on this contract you must sue on something else.
Mr. Barlow-On the absconding of the other partner there was a renewal of the contract.
This Lordship-That is the point. Did they renew?
-
Mr. Barlow - There has been a payment since.
His Lordship-That is not evidence of a
renewal.
Mr. Barlow accepted judgment against the undefended defendants.
ANOTHER GAMBLING RAID FATALITY.
When the police 1ade a gambling raid at 2 Po Yan Street on Sept. 5th, one of the gamblers rushed from the room, which was on the third floor, and jumped over the balcony into the street. He alighted on his head and was killed instantly.
|
conviction, and therefore they were not entitled to wages.
The question that remains is whether having been convicted by a competent court of summary jurisdiction the men could go behind that and claim their wages. I shall hold that the men were within their rights in refusing to proceed to Sasebo, and that the conclusion arrived at by the Harbour Master was contrary to the law of this country; I therefore come to the conclusion that the men are entitled to their wages up to the time of their arrival in this country. Judgment will there- fore be for the plaintiffs, for wages they are entitled to severally, up to the date of arrival in this country.
The 21 gamblers, who were captured, were convicted on Sept. 6, the first and second being fined $25 each and the remainder $3 each.
Mr. Hamilton, for the defendants, then asked for a stay of execution in order that the defendants, as this was a very important matter to the shipping world, might consider their position. His clients were prepared to money, together with the taxed costs, into
court.
pay
the
Mr. Justice Lawrence, on those terms, granted a stay of execution for 14 days, and on the money and costs being paid into court a stay up to and including the appeal.
153
FRUITS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE CHARGES AGAINST INSPECTOR H. J. W.
GIDLEY,
Mr. Ross Brown asked his Lordship to award the plaintiff damages, pointing out that under section 166 of the Merchant Ship- ping Act, his Lordship had power to award over and above the wages, damages, not exceed. ing £20 for each man..
Mr. Justice Lawrence declined to give any judgment as to damages.
The hearing of the charges of bribery pre- of the Sanitary Board was continued at the ferred against Inspector Hubert J. W. Gidley
Magistracy on September 3rd before Mr. H. H. J. Gompertz (First Police Magistrate). Mr. F. B. L. Bowley, Crown Solicitor, d and Mr. C. D. Wilkinson (of prosecut Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist) represented the defendant.
Mr. G. H. Gale, executive engineer, in the Public Works Department, said,—I madu an examination of the ground surface of certain houses on August 30th. I am acquainted with Ordinance relating to the concreting of ground sections 111 and 112 of the Public Works
surfaces. I inspected No. Queens Road West, a Chinese druggist's shop. The ground surface of the shop was covered with cement tiles. I did not disturb that floor. There was a yard at the back used as a kitchen. Part of it was paved with granite setts and part concreted with red Canton tiles. I did not open that. I took up one tile and found bardement concrete. After visited detailing other facts, witness said-1 No. 8 Bonham Strand West, the front part of which was laid with buff Cauton tiles, well laid. I did not take any up. Behind the small room the ground was paved with tiles. I lifted one and found broken stones and sand, there being no trace of any cement whatever.
Was that good lime concrete --- No. Was there a wash house at the back ?-
YUN. with a large wooden tank.
What was the ground surface? Partly granite and partly red Cauton tiles.
Did you lift a tile?—Yes. What did you fiad?— be concrete underneath
the
WAY very bad. I have a specimen here.
(Produced.)
Would that be described as concrete? -The
lime is visible but the concrete is not set.
Is this piece in the condition in which you found it? It is not so damp as when I found
it.
You took a piece of this and put it in water-Yes.
What happened ?-It dissolved.
I think there is communication between 5 queen's Road West and 10 Bonham Strand? Yes.
The Gazette contains a comparative state- ment of the revenue and expenditure for the period ended 30th June, 1906. The actual revenue amounts to $3,399,86401, as against $3,431.9 2.33 for the same period of preceding year, a decrease of $32,038.32 while the actual expenditure including public works extraordinary totals $3,319,821.41, as against $3,415,359.65 for the same period of the preceding year, a decrease of $95,338.22.
find: The door was covered with red Canton At No. 5 Queen's Road West what did you
tiles, very soft and very porous;
Did you examine the concrete ?—Yes. What did you find -The concrete was fairly firm but the matrix, the binding part of the concrete, was weak.
Would you call this particular specimen good lime-Not in my opinion,
At 10 Bonham Strand what did you find? -- The front part was lined with large buff tiles. very good.
found brick tiles with concrete under.
Behind the front shop-In that rom I
Did you find indications of any old hole ?-- Yes, the owner pointed to a spot where the floor had been patched up.
Where did you make your hole for inspection? -Immediately next to it.
What was the concrete like? Very soft with the matrix crumbling. I produce a sample.
Any trace of lime or cement about that ?- Yes, lime is visible,
Has it any effect?-No setting effect. It dissolves when placed in water.
Is that concrete ?-No.
would like to qualify that statement. It allowed Let us go to 135 Queen's Road West -I
to dry, it might have set.
You say it might have ret if the tiles had not been put on to it-Yes. It is not concreta. At 136 Queen's Road West what did you find?-Floors lime concrete with cement render-
ing on top.
That is in the front part - Yes,
You made a hole there and examined the concrete ?—Yes.
What did you find -The concrete soft with no trace of the action of lime.
At 138 Queen's Road West ?-I found there lime concrete with unglazed tiles?
You lifted the tiles?-Yes, and found the concrete fairly firm with the matrix crumbling.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.