The-Hong-Kong-Weekly-Press-1908-12-26 — Page 8

Page

1

.470

is the, say, way

#

[December 26, 1908.

CANTON.

{FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT,]

December 18th. KOWLOON-CANTON RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION IMPEDED BY OBSTINATE › PROPERTY OWNERS. The public is aware that a special price has been fixed by the Chinese Government for the redemption of land required by the Kowloon. Canton Railway for the construction of the Chinese section of this line, and notices have been forwarded to all the landowners of the different districts through which the railway is to pass requesting them to send in the tittle deeds of their properties and have them trans- ferred to the Railway Company and obtain payment. It is reported that many of the property owners have refused to send in their title deeds for the transfer of their land at the price fixed by the Government and are demand- ing their own prices for the properties. The Railway Bureau has reported the matter to the Viceroy who has instructed the Provincial Trea surer to draw up a proclamation and forward copies of it to the Magistrates of Poon Yu, Tsang Shing. Tung Koon etc., for the information of the people of their respective districts.

are

THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND

I can find which helps in any

otherwise than colloquially, that the statement in Coote (page 9) that it is clear compradore is surety for the firm's losses in their that a mortgage does not itself imply dealings with Chinese customers; that would be covenant. But if this is so then it disposes to beg the questions in issue, which are whether of the idea that the conditions for redemption he is surety; if so, what is the extent of the can be treated as covenants. I hesitate to say suretyships? What are the obligations he has that this carries us, the whole way towardy undertaken? What are the remedies agreed to solving the difficulties in the present case; but for enforcing these obligations? The compra- it certainly goes a long way towards meeting dore system is based upon express agreement, the argument that what is stated in the that is to say, agreements for undertake mortgage becomes evidence of the obligations Ling liability have been entered into between which the defendant has taken upon him- a European firm and a Chinese intermediary between them and the Chinese customers, self as mortgagor." If they are not coven-

has this intermediary

come to ants there cannot be evidence of covenants; and

be but are nothing more than what they called a compradore. Test it this way-are profess to be, conditions of redemption. The all compradores liable for losses caused by puzzle is to find out how they can by more dealings with Chinese customers known or reference in the agreement to be liable for the unknown? I really don't know, and certainly moneys due under the mortgage become any- cannot assume it. So the mortgage here does thing more than they are, even though these not determine the extent of the liability, and by words are added, whether these moneys exceed the agreement the defendant simply covenants in amount the value of the proceeds of the sale to pay the liability under the mortgage; there, of the premises and the $55,000 security of fore the liability is left in the air. If then, the the agreement. as something due under the agreement is ineffectual to charge the defendant agreement. How can an agreement to pay

with any actual or. determined liability, and if what is owing under the mortgage become a there is no personal covenant in the mortgage,

when real agreement to pay a definite sum nor anything in the combined documents which there is nothing owing under the mortgage? can be construed into a personal covenant the

The wording of the proclamation is as It seems to me that to call these conditions of only remedy which the plaintiff has is that redemption " evidence of the compradore's which the mortgage gives him against the follows:-

a lower plane property which he has taken as security; obligations" is to put them on

This proclamation is issued to inform

property The and therefore the proceeds of the property all the

owners, that they than is essential to support the action. agreement refers to them as obligation, and these. become the limit of the compradore's liability. required to comply with the request to forthwith they are not, and unless they are obligations there What is so extraordinary to my mind is that register their addresses at the Land Redemption Bureau and send in the title deeds of their be taken for cannot be sued upon. Some stress was laid on security being intended to olause 12 of the agreement, which provides that the fulfillment of the obligations of the com- properties where their land has been surveyed the entries in the firm's books are to be con- pradore, as surety of the Chinese customers, and required by the Railway Company for the clusive evidence against the compradore both of the liabilities which he is allowed to incur on the construction of the line, and await the paymen the fact of sales and of losses incurred there- supposed basis of the suretyship far exceed the of the purchase money according to the fixed under. But this cannot turn the other clauses amount of the security. It is just because of schedule of rates. They are warned not to of the agreement into something which they this assuming it to have been the intention of treat their land as rare commodities and offer The Magistrates are are not. The clause does not create liability. the parties-that the personal covenant should resistance and delay. but simply provides the machinery for ascertain. have been inserted; and it is because of this instructed to notify and command the gentry ing such liability as may exist. It would that this complicated question had had to be of their respective districts that they must not stir up the people to insist on their own prices operate to determine the amount which would argued. I have been compelled to express an have to be paid as the condition for redemption. opinion upon it with such materials as were laid and thus delay the transfer of their properties The text books deal entirely, so far as I can see, before me, together with such light as my own to the Company. If they should be discovered with mortgages to secure a loan; the talk is researches among the authorities threw upon it. doing this the Magistrates are to arrest them always about repayment of the principal sum, I cannot profess to be satisfied with the result and have them severely punished. The Land and they go so far as to say that

because I am uncertain whether I have got Redemption Bureau in the respective districts loan". mortgage implies

which, it to the bottom, of the matter, for the law of will receive the title deeds sent to them and this clear,

mortgage does not. Then mortgages goes far back into the earliest after careful investigation if found in proper

decisions of the Courts, and it may

<rder will issue orders for payment to the the other mortgage terms with which we

that I have not

overlooked appropriate be

occult property owners for collection of same. Every- familiar here: the mortgagee's right is foreclosure. principle which would tell in the plaintiff's thing will be done in a proper and fair way and He expressly declines to exercise it because the favour. All I can say is that in the event of in accordance with the regulations laid down.

SUBSIDIARY COINAGE QUESTION AGAIN. property has depreciated and he prefers to sue the case going further I must invite the learned on the alleged agreement; though I am not Counsel engaged to a more profound study of sure what he thinks he can do with the morts the early law than was possible before a Court With regard to the case of gage, when and if he were to got his judgment in of first instance. this action and did not satisfy it by execution. ex-parte Bishop to which I have referred, I The mortgagee's right is redemption; but must not be understood as expressing any what is the value of the equity of redemption if opinion one way or the other as to its bearing the claim against him is far in excess of the on this case, nor have I formed any opinion. I value of the security? Again the personal do not think that I should be justified in direct

the point. It can be covenant in mortgages for loans is said to being a re-argument on implied and the security collateral, but this is taken on appeal if the plaintiff is so advised. because there is in fact à loàn, and the mortgage With regard to the counter claim, it by no has been given as security for repayment. means follows from what I have said that the There is outside the ordinary mortgage the defendant is necessarily entiled to judgment on Every the counter claim. If the additional cash secur- fact that a loan has been given. mortgage implies a loan; every loan a debt; itý of $55.000 was so linked on with the security

there were до covenant and though

given by the mortgage that the conditions of the personal estate or ophoud

of the the redemption of the mortgage were also the borrower must remain liable to pay off the conditions for releasing the security, then the mortgage." (Coote page

10) which means plaintiff could hold the $55,000 until the losses obviously "the debt implied in the mortgage to resulting from dealings with Chinese customers secure the loan. Now, is it possible to draw

were paid. But, although I have searched any analogy between this doctrine and the through both ducuments, I can find only a few mortgage given to guarantee the performance sentences which point that way, but none which Clause of a suretyship? It seems to me that it is here justify me in coming to that conclusion. that the plaintiff might possibly succeed. It 11 of the agreement refers to the fulfilment of the obligations of the compradore, that is to seems to me just possible that the case of ex- parte Bishop, to which I referred in Chan Ki'say, the obligations of the mortgage and the case might carry the plaintiff through; but this agreement which only raises the same question as is raised in the plaintiff's case, and which I was not argued and I cannot myself devise the argument if there is one. I can only express have already decided. Defendant must therefore such opinion on the analogy as occurs to the. I have judgment with posts on claim and for his should be bound to hold that every such agree-counter claim. ment as the one before me implies the existence of a compradore: and that every compradore guarantees all his firm's losses with Chinese customers; and that therefore an action lies to recover these losses, that is, to enforce the surety- ship outside the mortgage. So we come back to the point from which we started: I cannot at present assume without more that these are the duties of the compradore. I cannot at present

are

are

A

very

every is

་

|

some

On the applicatio of Mr. Pollock, his Lord- y of execution for three ship granted a month give the parties an opportunity of considering the matter.

The King's Exequatur empowering Mr. Leiria to act as Consul for Portugal and for Brazil at Hongkong has received His Majesty's signature.

}

The following is the gist of a dispatch sent by the Viceroy to the Wai-wu-pu in reply to a communication received from that Board re the subsidiary coinage question

The Viceroy says he has received many dispatches regarding this coinage question, all urging him to stop production. This is due to the British Minister being ignorant of the exact state of affairs in the South and the real of the money market. The-British state Minister has not sufficiently inquirety into the matter. He only points out persistently that it is an obstruction to trade. This is incorrect. From inquiries made the Viceroy says it is im- possible to stop the minting of subsidiary coins and that it must continue. The Viceroy really be. lieves that the coinage is insufficient. Hefurther remarks that although the Sin-Hau-Kuk(Bureau of Local Affairs) pays only a certain percentage of the officials, salaries and soldiers wages in sub sidiary coins, yet the supply is insufficient. The banks, shops and merchants often run short of The Viceroy contemplates in these, coins. creasing the production to meet the demands of the market and help trade. In conclusion His Excellency says it is impossible to comply with the British Minister's request in this matter.

The Viceroy has sent a similar dispatch to the Board of Revenue at Peking.

PIRACT ON THE WEST RIVER.

It is reported that strong re】›resentations have been made by the British Minister at Peking that piracy is still rife on West River, that foreign vessela trading in that River are being insufficiently guarded against attacks by pirates and that the notorious pirate chief Luk Lan Ching who is at the bottom of all the trouble is still at large and that both foreign and Chinese vessels trad- ing inland have been victimised by him. It appears he has recently been sending

▸

{