270
B WATRE SUPPLY.
Mf. Frank Browne, Government Analyst, after examination of four samples of water from the public mains, reported that the liquid was of excellent quality.
SUPREME COURT.
Monday, October 15th.
IN SUMARY JURISDICTION. BEFORE MR. A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGE).
STRUCK OUT.
The Chuen Hing firm sued Leung Tsun- tang and others to recover 8725.03 for goods sold and delivered by the plaintiffs to the Kung Sin firm.
Mr. F. B. Deacon (of Messrs. Deacon, Looker and Deacon) who appeared for the third defendant asked his Lordship to dismiss the action against him. The speaker had given notice to Mr. H rding, the plaintiff's solicitor as his Lordship suggested, and was iuformed that Mr. Harding was no longer ins ructed.
His Lordship-Mr. Harding'e plaintiff all round ?
Mr. Denoon-Yes, and he is not here. His Lordship-Is anyone appearing for the
other defendante ?
Mr. Deacon-No. One is bankrupt and the other has not been sarved.
His Lordship-Well. I will strike the case out with costs, and they can fight it out among themselves.
CLAIM FOR BOARD,
Tsoi Chik nam claimed from John Herd and Yung Sing-kin the sum of $1,0 being balance of price agreed for hoard and lodgings of the first defendant from Septembar 28th, 19 5, to September 28th, 19 6.
Mr. J. H. Gardi er (of Mr. O. D. Thomson's office) appeared for the plaintiff Mr. E. Grist (of Messrs Wilkinson and Grist) for the first defendant, and Mr., P. Hett ( f Messrs. Bruton and Hett) for the second defendant.
His Lordshi said the first defendant conli not be sud under the amendment in the writ.
Mr. Gardiner-I dou't think I have released him by this amendment.
His Lordship-But I don't think you can sue him.
Mr. Gardiner-I will prove to your Lordship the agreement was that if the first defendant did not pay the second would.
Mr. Grist He ought to sue on guarantee. His Lordship -The only person you can sue on that writ is the second defendant. You can- not sue the first, as he has never promised to pay so far as I can see.
Mr. Gardiner-I am not pressing the case against the first d-fendant.
His Lordship-My own impression is that there must be judgment for the first defendant.
Mr. Grdiner-I don't mind. His Lordship-Very well.
Now, after eliminating the first, are you correct in your form of proceeding against the second?
Mr. Gardiner-I am suing on & promise made on September 28th, last year, at the time when Mr. Herd took up his quarters at the Stag Hotel.
His Lordship-Perhaps we had better go on
with that.
Mr. Gardiner said Mr. Herd, the first defend ant, was engaged by the Wong Yik Company under contract to come over here from British Columbia to superintend the construction of saw mills at Canton. He arrived over twelve months ago and had been here ever si ce with oat, he believed, receiving any remuneration, although under his agreement he was to be paid $40 a month. The second defend nt. Mr. Gardiner understood, had an interest in the Wong Yik Company.
Mr. att-I understand that is not so. Mr. Gardiner The Wong Yik Company used the Man. Yik Tong, of which the second defendant is owner, as its headquarters.
THE HONGĦONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
Continuing, Mr. Gardiner said the arrange...: ment was that $100 should be paid for the room engaged, including board and lodgings. The No. 1 boy, who was present when the arrangement was made, said he did not know Mr. Herd, and would require a month's pay ment in advance. The second defendant said it the account was sent to the Man Yik Tong he wou'd see that it was paid and he made an eatry in the hotel book to the effect that he wou'd hold himself liable. When Mr. Hord was asked for money he re erred the hotel people to Man Yik Tong. The account was then submitted to that firm, and on October 30th the first month's board was paid. The second month's money w 18 also paid, but after that, although the plaintiffs continually applied to the second defendant they had never received a payment.
|
|
[October 20, 1906.
Mr. E. J. Grist, for Me. Otto Kɔng Sing, represented the plaintiff, and Mr. J. H. Gardiner, from the offics of Mr. O. D. Thomson, appeared for the defendant.
Mr. Gardiner applied for an adjournment as other witnesses he wished to call had not arrived · | from Canton.
His Lordship-I cannot allow another ad- journment. You have had six days to get the witnesses here, besides, any other evidence you call must be to discredit that of the man who was in charge of your junk.
Mr. Gardiner-I should like to explain. His Lordship-Certainly, but I wont allow a further adjournment.
Mr. Gardiner-As your Lordship said, this man is very ignorant.
His Lordship-Yes, and I have written it down.
Mr. Gardiner-This man got mixed up in his story.
When evidence in support of the plaintiff's case had concluded Mr. Hett said it was trus that his client accompani d the first defendant to the Stag Hotel on his arrival in the Colony, The question was then raised as to payment and the second defendant told the hotel propris. for that if he would forward the accounts to him at the Man Yik Tong he would remit them to Catou and pay when he received th money,sibly owing to his ignorance. When the second defendant was pressed by the manaver of the Stag Ho'el for a third instal- ment he told the shroff that he was not going to accept any more responsibility, and to make himself doubly sure on that head. he wrote a letter to that effect to the proprietor of the Stag Hotel on th same day. The chit book in which that letter was seut was sigued by the manager of the hotel. Mr. Hett had paid the sum of $37, the amount his client admitted owing, into Court,
His Lordship-I am very sorry, Mr. Gardiner, but he goes and tells you one story and me another. You want to discredit your own witness?
Mr. Gardiner -The mistake made was pos-
After Mr. Lobo, manager of the hotel, got into the box and swore that he had received the letter which plaintiff denied receiving,
His Lordship asked-Do you think you can carry on much farther, Mr. Gardiner!
were
Mr. Gardiner-I don't think I can, your Lordship, bal B8 the arrangements monthly, I submit that the second defendant is liable for a mou'b's board.
His Lordship did not agree and gare judg. ment for the amount paid into Court with costs up to the time of payment in
Tuesday, October 16th.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
BEFORE Ms. A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGE),
THE COST OF TREE PLANTING.
Wan
The cise was continued in which Wong and another sued Yu Wo-kai to recover the sum f $964.55 for the planting of fir trees in the New Territory.
As before Mr. J.H. Gardiner (of Mr. O.D. Thomson's offics) appeared for plaintiffs, while Mr. R.F.C. Master (of Messrs. Johnson, Stokes and Master) represented the defendant.
In his opening statement for the defence Mr Master said it was admittei that 8 verbal contract was entered into between the plaintiff and the firm of which defendant was a partner, but not with the defendant personally. The terms of this verbal contract were in dispute. It was given in evidence in the plain- tiffs' case that they were to receive eleven cash a furlong for digging and planting. It was ab-urd on the face of it that plaintiffs and defendant should contract for such a prics when the contract might amount to nothing more than digging holes and sewing seeds. His client admitted that a certain number of holes were dug by the plaintiffs, but contended that he had paid the price agreed up ›n, four cash per furlong.
Case adjourned,
Wednesday, October 17th.
IN SUMMARY JURISDICTION.
Mr. Hard has been staying at the Stag Hotel BEFORE MR. A. G. WISE (PUISNE JUDGE). since his arrival on September 28th. 1905, and on the evening of that day the second defendant accompanied him to the hotel to engage his
room.
His Lordship-Is the plaintiff the proprietor of the hotel?
Mr. Gardiner-Yes, my Lord.
A JUNK COLLISION.
Yuk Seung sued Fong Lau for the recovery of $224 in respect of damage to plaintiffs juok caused by the unskilful navigation of defendant's junk and expenses incurred by four days' deten- tion in Canton.
|
His Lordship-I know this; that his evideace tallied with that given by the other side. That, of course, does not suit you.
Mr. Gardiner-If your Lordship wont allow me to call further evidence I don't see how I can possibly succeed.
Hi Lordship-You admit your junk was to blame?
Mr. Gardiner-Yes, I admit that, His Lordship-But you set up contributory negligence?
Mr. Gardiner-Yes.
His Lordship-Well, I say there was no con- tributory negligenes at all. This junk of yours, as I said before, was like a Chinaman in the street-seemed to think the whole roadway belonged to it.
}
Mr. Gardiner-But there was a typhoon." His Lordship-No, no. It is about the ol-arest case I have ever had. There will be judgment for the plaintiff less 814 demurrage, and costs.
Thursday, October 18th.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF JUSTICE).
THE BRIBERY CASE 1. The Attorney-Gəneral informed His Lord- ship that the special jury would not b› required until Tuesday, when the bribery cases would be opened. He asked his Lordship to extend Inspectors Wird and Gidley's bail until that date, and the Chief Justice consented.
A WORD TO THE JURORS. His Lordship-Gentlemen of the Jury, I have one word to say before discharging you. The Registrar has received several applications for exemption on personal grounds. I want it to be distinctly understood that it is quite impossible for me to exempt jurymen from performing the duty which the law has cast upon them. There is no power in the law to exe opt you and it is the prisoners' right that they should have the full panel. The only ease in which it is possible to exempt a juryman is where the public interest comes in, and that is a case which will always be considered by the Law Officer of the Crown and myself. I would also sy with regard to the friendly medical certificate that that must be expressed in terms that the jury. man is not capable of sitting on that day on the jury. It is quite impossible for me to recognise a medical certificate sent in to-day for exemption when the dite of sitting as a juryman will be next Tuesday. I have only got to remind you that if any person desires to be exempted, he casts upon somebody else the obligation of performing the duty for him.
NO INDICTMENT.
The Attorney-General informed His Lordship that no indictment had been filed in the case in which Boots >ingh was charged with indecent assault, and prisoner was discharged.
i
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.