December 24, 1906.]
Mr. Almada-The writ is against the Kwong Fuk Cheong, and it was served on the Kwong Fuk Cheong Sing Kee.
Mr. Daniels-I would ask to have the Sing Kee firm joined as parties to the defendants in this action. We had no notion there was such a firm.
His Lordship-Then why did you go and serve them?
Mr. Daniels-There was no indication outside the shop or other means to lead us to suppose that the shop had changed hands.
His Lordship-You've never served defendant yet; you've served someone else.
Mr. Daniels-We 800 the Kwong Fuk Cheong and served the writ on the shop b aring that name, and where that business has always been carried on.
His Lordship-The trouble is, as far as I can see, that you have to serve the defendant.
Mr. Daniels--You have only my friend's statement for that. I am prepared to prove service on the Kwong Fuk Cheong.
His Lordship-Well, prove it. The Bailiff was called and said he served the wril on the Kwong Fuk Cheong.
His Lordship The order I made was that a copy of the writ of summons should be serred on some inmate of 247 Des Voeux Road West, the last known place of the said defendants.
Mr. Daniel-I was not in the case at the time, but was under the impression that that order was made with reference to the first defendant.
The Bailiff said he served the writ ou Fung Shan-oam.
His Lordship-Then there is no service on the firm.
Mr. Daniela-The application was to serve on 7 ung Shan-nam, but we are not desling with him.
His Lordship-Well, you had better serve the writ on the others.
Mr. Daniels-We've done so.
His Lordship-Not on the order I made. The Bailiff said he served a writ on the firm first, and then on the person in charge of the business.
His Lordship--What business; what was the name on the outside of the shop?
The Bailiff The Kwong Fuk Cheong. His Lordship-Well, you've served the Kwong uk Cheong, you can take a judgmeut against them, and fight the question out after- wards as to whether it is the same firm.
Mr.
Daniels-The Kwong Fuk Cheong ca ried on business at the address in ques iou for many years, and there was nothing to indicate that another firm is now established there
His Lordship-I will give judgment against the Kwong Fuk Cheong, and then the issue will arise as to whether the firm is the Kwong Fak Cheong or the Kwong Fuk Cheong Sing
Ker.
The master of the firm in question was called, and stated that when be took the business over it was the Kwong Fuk Cheong, but he changed the name to Kwong Fuk Cheong Sing Kee.
His Lordship-Whom do you want judgment against?
Mr. Daniels-The Kwong Fuk Cheong. His Lorkship-Whatabout Fung Shan-nam? Mr. Daniels-I did not know we were proceed ing against him at this particular stage, but if your Lordship will give judgment against him it will save coming up here again.
His Lordship-I give yon judgment and costs aginst the Kwong Fuk Cheong for $350.
IN BANKRUPTCY.
BEFORE SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF JUSTICE).
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
of oil might have been a sp∙culation on the part of Chung Shun-koo. Also, it may have been a speculation on both sides.
Mr. Looker-We have a doubt as to the validity of these contracts. When a man becomes heavily involved it is to the interest of everybody to squeeze what they can out of him | before he becomes bankrupt.
His Lordship-I am afraid that is only an inference.
Mr. Looker Quite so. my Lord. It is a point of comment, The debtor had chosen, at a per ol when it did not matter whether he owed one lac of dollars or two, to admit the damages.
CHUNG SHUN-KOO'S AFFAIRS. The hearing of certain creditors' claims in the insolvent estate of Chung Shun-koo was continued.
His Lordship-The debtor entered iato many contracts.
|
Mr. Looker-If it is a sign of wealth to enter, into many contracts, then the debtor must have been 巍 wealthy man. It seems to me it is more a sign of enterprise. The debtor is not a man who deals in oil himsqlf. If a man chooses to enter into a contract the way this rondor did it is at his own risk if the other party goes into bankruptcy.
Mr. H. W. Looker (of Messrs. Deacon, Louker and Deacon) represented the official Trustee Bad Mr. Ho Tung, one of the principal creditors, while Mr. M. W. Slade, instructed by Mr. F. X. d'Almada e Castro, appeared for other creditors whose claims were challenged.
The examination of Chan Ou-ping regarding his claim having concluded, his Lordship said they could go to the extent of saying that the entering intoa contract for such a large quantity
Mr. lade submitted that the vendor in this case could claim the profit he would have made had the purchaser carried out the contract, and that it was always open for him to sell future goods.
The case was again adjourned.
Wednesday, December 19th.
IN CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
BEFORE SIR FRANCIS Piggott (CHILE
JUSTICE).
VARBOCK OFFICE ASSAULT CASE.
Chú Pu-lin was arraigned on three counts of assault occasiouing bodily harm.
Hoo. Mr. H H. J. Gompertz, Ltorney General, instructed by Mr. G. E. Morrell (of the Crown Solicitor's office) prosecuted, accused being undefended.
A plea of unt guilty was entered, and the following jury was empanoiled; -W. C. 1). Turner (foreman), H. W. Laster, J. R. Forbes, G. Moffat, A. Watson, A. Shaw and H. A. Meyer.
On
429
exemplary and courageous conduct of Indian Bergeant 656, Amar Singh, who, seeing a man rushing across the road with a knife in his band, and not knowing what had happened before, dashed after him, and when be jumped into the harbour followed and captured him, at the risk of his life. By doing this he might have been the means of capturing a murderer who otherwise would have escaped, and might never have been found. The speaker thought i few words of commendation from his Lordship would be appropriate, and would encourage others.
His Lordship called the Sergeant before him, and told him that on the occasion in question his conduct had been very courageous and exemplary, and he had much pleasure in com. mending him for it. He trusted that the sergeant and all other Indian police in this Colony would continue to do their duty in such an exemplary manner.
|
Amar Singh saluted and walked proudly out of Court.
man
DISOBEYING A BANISHMENT ORDER.
Shek Tai alia Chan Lenng-ng was indicted on the charge of disobeying a banishment order. Prisoner pleaded guilty and district watch. Lam Chi, who was formerly a police constable, gave evidence as to putting him on board the .. Hoihow on October 3rd, and seeing the vessel leave port with him on board.
Sentence of one year's imprisonment with hard labour was passed.
MANSLAUGHTER.
Gulam Sher was charged with the man- slaughter of Ng Fak on November 13th at Makpangham in the New Territory,
Prisoner pleaded not guilty and the following jurors were called :-J. I. Andrew (foreman), A. Klein, H. P. G. Warnsloh, J. A. Hansen, H. C. Gray, C. E. A. Hrace and R. Esrs.
After Hearing the evidence the jury found the prisoner guilty, and taking into consideration his youth and small knowledge of life in the Colony, his Lordship sentenced him to one year's imprisonment with hard lsbour.
The Attorney-General stated that deceased, & Chinaman, was on November 13th driving a pig along the road to Mongkok. The defendant, whom he passed, for some reason or other threw a handful of earth at the pig. This acnoyed deceased, who told him not to do it agaio, probably addressing him as a Chinaman usually does in his anger. The defendant struck doceas d two blows on the chest, and the latter no doubt being irritated, called him The Attorney-General stated that there was ** moro kwai." Defendant then ran after him, a very large emigration from this place to the apparently in a great passion, and hit him twice Straits Settlements, some lens of thousands of on the ribs. The man fell down and became coolies going from here every year to either insensible. Defendant was then seized by the Penang or Sngapor`. Owing to the abuses employees of a rail way contractor. The China- practiced in connection with this business, the man died shortly afterwards, and the medical Government of this Colony made certain restric-evidence would show that death was due to tions on emigration. The male emigrants were rupture of the spleen, which might have been examined by an officer at the Harbour Office caused by a blow. Accused denied baving struck who questioned them if they knew where they deceased. were going, and if they were willing to go. November 10th, about 10 a.m. Mr. Botelho, who had been a clerk in the Harbour Office for about 3-4 years, as conducting this examination. The defendant went before him, the usual questions were put and the examination forminated satisfactorily. Instead of taking his ticket, however, the defendant rushed violently at Mr. Botelho, murmuring some. thing uniutelligible at the time. Ha caught Mr. Botelho by the throat, but the latter threw him off Then Kwok Chuen attempted to secure the accused, but was stabbed with a knife. Chan Fak rushed to the assistance of Kwok, and he also was knifed. Defeudaut then ran away and jumped into the Larbour. He was followed by an Indian, Sergeant attached to the Harbour Office, who ju ped in after and esptured him. When defendant jumped into the barbour be was carrying a knife. This was found two or three days afterwards in the barbour by a diver from H.M.S. King Alfred, and would be produced. Kwok Chuen was badly wounded and had to remain in hospital for a fortnight while the other man was laid up for 18 days. Mr. Botelho was not injured by the knife; but, if he had not defendant himself, he
might have been.
Evidence concladed, his Lordship directed the jury, who returned a verdict of guilty.
Prisoner was sentenced to three ye rs im- prisonment on the first count, three on the second and one on the third. The first and second sentences are concurrent.
INDIAN BERGEANT COMMENDED.
The Attorney-General, at the conclusion of this case, brought to the notios of the Court the
Friday, December 21st,
IN BANKRUPTCY,
BEFORE SIR FRANCIS PIGGOTT (CHIEF -
JUSTICE).
PUBLIC EXAMINATION.
The Sun Cheung firm ca parte Luk Yu-nam. The examination of Lo Ming, managing partner of the bankrupt firm, was continne i by Mr. J. S. Harston (of Messrs. Ewens and Harston) who appeared for Messrs. Shewan, Tomes and Co., creditors.
Deb tor gave dates of certair payments he made to Messrs. Shewan, Tomes and Co., in connection with brokerage.
Mr. Harston-Are you aware that not one single date you have given is correct?
Debtor-I gave dates as entered in my books. Continuing he said he had not paid any money away to relations. Having lost all his money in business, he realised on his railway shares and used the money to support his children. The shares sold for $180.
How do you account for the fact that ́although your assets were only 8900, you owed Shewan, Tomes and Co. $11,970? That's large discrepancy.-I lost in business,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.