June 26, 1909.]
action against Reuter, Brockelmann & Co? About then,
-
By the 27th Jonuary, 1908, you had been working for that firm or about nine months — There had not been much done. The pleadings were not closed.
You had the sole conduct of the case ?--Yes. Do you deny that Wong Hui Tung made you any loan or gave you any presents?-Absolutely. Witness was then questioned as to the several amounts alleged to have been received by him and gave a denial in each instance.
Can you suggest any reason why Wong 1 ui Tung should come here and perjure him- self? - Yes.
What? The fact that he considers the costs too high and that r. Hastings has in hand $300 due to the Kwong Bing Cheong, and that if he assists Mr. Hastings Mr. Hastings will probably do something for him.
Witness then denied other charges of having received sums of money from Wong Hai Tung. With regard to the $500 alleged to have been paid by Wong for costs on the 23rd July, there was no necessity for such at that time, as judgment had been given for them and they expected costs. Witness was then questioned on the account for costs amounting to $11.575 and gave reasons for the various sums set down. With regard to the $4,500 costs in connection with the Reuter, Brockelmann case he had drawn that amount which was lodged in court as security for costs because he was as certain as a solicitor could be that they would be awarded costs. He remembered when Wong Hui Tung came for his first account. He would not accept a date in December, as his impression was that it was in September. Probably he saw Wong on the day stated. He could not be certain. He did not remember giving instructions to Kent to prepare an account. He was prepared to say that Kent was wrong when he said witness ordered him to supply of the ledger. All that Wong got on paper was a copy of the ledger. It was fully ex- plained to him by witness. As the preliminary accountstood it was very misleading, but witness did not keep the ledger. Probably he did not see that account before it was given to Wong,
A
copy
He did not explain the account but the position to Wong, and justified his request for additional substantial costs. He did not know that he saw the account before Wong got it. He saw it afterwards. He did not have a proper account made out, as Wong was satisfied with the explanations given. Witness remembered Wong saying that the account showed he was $2,000 short, and on looking at the account he saw how that was. He did not admit blame for that misleading account being given to Wong. It was not given so that Wong would not be able to sea that he had not been credited with the $500 paid for costs on 23rd July; there was a lot of items which did not appear in that account. Witness did not think it necessary to give another account because Wong was satisfied with the explanation given. Witness agreed that there was no account given to him until April to show that he had not been credited with the $500. Witness remembered Wong coming to the office in the middle of April. e was supplied with an account It was not true that he offered $10,800 to close the whole affair. If witness had done so Wong would probably have jumped at the offer. He remembered when Wan hi came to see him in January. He was brought into his room by Tam.. It was possible Wan asked him to quote a lump sum for costs. Hertook $30 from. Wan on account of costs. That ineant there might possibly be more to come." Witness a certain 850 was not agreed upon, because he would have entered it as an agreed sum in his diary. He was no party to any arrangement that $50 should be paid for the first day. When Wan Hi and Tam said so they were not telling the truth. Wan was prob ably got at, as the lower Chinese were easily got at by Tam in the interests of Mr. Hastings. Hothought it was false that the police intro, duced Wan to Mr. Hastings. He suggested that Tam had seen him previously.
Have you not subpoaned Inspector Fanson? -I don't think so.
You say this story of coming to your office on 14th January and paying you $2 is absolute fiction?--Yes, absolutely false.
You have given us certain items of accounts this morning amounting in all to $325-Yes.
F
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
They amount merely to a bare subsistence P Yes. There is the Club.
It is for the barest necessities ?-Very well. Is this an estimate for two persons? - It is. You don't suggest for a moment that it is a complete account of your monthly expenses ?--- No.
There is no item paid down for clothes? My clothes are sent out from home, except linen clothes.
|
Do you provide the European woman with clothes?
Witness My Lord, is it necessary to go into all these details?
Mr Potter They have been gone into. Witness It is a side issue.
The Puisne Judge-You have brought up the matter yourself.
-
EIGHTH DAY.
657
Mr. Dixon, re-examined by Mr. Calthrop, said. in addition to his salary he received interest of “ his share of the mortgage. That was paid in cash. During 19 8 Mr. Sergeant, of Messrs. Wilkinson and Grist, stayed in the house and shared the expenses of messing. Witness produced a certificate from the Hank showing that $5,000 was transferred from his current account to fixed deposit on 25th June, 1905. It showed that his current account was credited with the equivalent of £100 on 27th December, £60 on 2nd April, 196, £70 on 10th July, 1906, and that the balance on current account on 31st December, 1907, was $2,293.28.
Cross-examined by Mr. Potter-84,000 of this $5,000 was put on mortgage?—Yes.
With regard to these items did you write home for that money ?--Yes.
You mean that at the end of 1905 or 1906 yoq?
Mr. Potter There is no item for clothes? No.
Do you supply the European woman with required money - No. clothes? Yes.
No item down for that?--No.
Do you pay this woman anything ?-I give her what I am able. What she requires.
There is no item for that? —No.
Do you keep wines and spirits in your house? A little, yes.
There is no item for that ?-There is. Which? The Mutual Stores.
Do you suggest $19 a month covers grocers and wines? -You should refer to the cook's account as well.
I am asking about wines and spirits. Does $19 cover that?--You have got the receipts there.
Did you ask it for the purpose of investing money?—I had an idea of investing.
Did you invest any ?-I invested $4,000. If you did not require it for investment wh did you ask for it? Was it to meet your current expenses? No.
You had no particular object?-No. If an likely investment came along I would invest it
And no likely investment came along ?-No. From whom did you get it ?-Is that material. . I suggest it is material?-I got it from hom Did you get it from your father ?—No. Do you object to tell from whom you got it ? No. I got it from my uncle.
You say that although you had no need for money and although you did not invest it you asked your uncle for money PL He has often
Have you any champagne in your house? No. I see you make no allowance for lighting or washing or other incidentals of that kind?-given me money. You have not looked at the accounts.
I am going by the accounts which you have| given us this morning ?- Have you referred to the cook's book ?
Does the cook do the washing? No, the cook does not do the washing.
There is $69 down in the cook's book. What do you suggest that covers ?- No answer.
Will you show me any item for washing and lighting? I have an amah. As to the lighting you will see there are charges for kerosene.
As a matter of fact don't you get your washing done at the Steam Laundry-Only a few collars. Only about a dollar or two a month.
Now. Mr. Dixon, I just want to put this question. Do you allege that the amount you made out this morning and other expenses can be met out of your salary?--Yes.
$420 a month covers everything?-I don't say that.
I ask you if you can meet these expenses out of your salary -I have other sources of income, Out of your salary?-It does not matter. I have mentioned one source of income from Messrs. Hastings and Hastings.
Did you send that woman on a holiday last year?-She went away.
Wasn't it to America?-Yes.
You paid the expenses?-Some of them.
MR. CALTHROP RE-EXAMINES.
Re-examined by \r Calthrop-When he said that he was not on friendly terms with Mr. Hastings since h s return he would explain it by saying that he did not go to Mr Hastings' house as before, and that Mr Hastings was different in his manner. When his salary was raised in March, 1905, he did not get more dollars than when he arrived in the colony. After Mr. Davidson came to the firm in October, 19 7. he did Summary Court, police court, bankruptcy and chamber work which Mr. Hastings had formerly entrusted te him, as Mr. Hastings cared more for work in the office.
LJ
You suggest in the first case that Mr. astings was misled as to the charges against you P-Yes.
You don't know what Mr. John Hastings will do at the end of the year?-Oh, no; it is all hearsay. Be did not tell me when he thought of going.
You don't know whether he intends to remain as a partner or not?—I have no idea.
From March, 1905, filf March, 1906, you and Mr. George Hastings managed the business? Yes, and it was the busiest year we have had; probably the busiest in the history of every fegal firm in the colony.
The hearing was adjourned.
You wrote for the money? Do you wish to go back on that?- So, I don't wish to go back on it. Then you did ask him for these sums of money? Yes.
The Paisne Judge-Has the mortgage been paid off?
Witness It was paid off three weeks ago. Witness-I should like to amend the state- ment with reference to this money I received from home. I had £200 when I was at home) and it was remitted to me by my uncle.
Mr. Potter-Is that part of this 34,001 de posit?-Yes,
Mr. Kent, cashier, was then called and ques- tioned by the Chief Justice with reference to an entry he had made in the diary in connection with the Wan Hi case on 8th January.
The Chief Justice-Would you consider it your duty to make entries in a solicitor's diary? Yes.
Have you ever been authorised to do it ?—No. Have you ever reported to anybody that you had done it ?
Have you reported to the owner
of the diary 2 -Yes. So metimes I was told to make an entry at the time in the diary.
.
Who told you? Mr. Dixon or Mr. Hastings, Were you told to make that entry - No. When you made an entry in the diary without being told did you report to the owner that you had done so ?- No.
Why not? Because I did not think it was necessary.
Can you show other diaries, that of Mr. Hastings or Mr. Davidson in which you have
made entries ?—Yes.
Did you get this entry from the rough cash book Partly and partly from the interpreter.
What did the interpreter tell you?-I asked him what the money was paid for and he said it was for a police court case.
Did he tell you details?—Yes. The costs were $50 agreed upon.
Why didn't you put it down?—I put down the costs on account.
Why didn't you put down $50 agreed costs as the interpreter told you ?-I don't usually.
You don't usually make entries in the diary? --- No.
Why didn't you put down what the inter- preter told you, $50 agreed costs?—I did not
think it was necessary.
• Mr. Potter then examined witness to show that when costs had been paid they should be entered in a portfolio. When witness BAW. the $30 entered in the rough cash book he wished to enter it in the portfolio, but found there was none, and on looking in Mr. Dixon's diary he found there was no entry, and
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.