Shanghai, 7th July. Before Taotai Tsar Curls, President of the Bureau of Foreign Affairs at Nanking, and Sir Nicnoas J. Haxxes, H.B.M's Consul-General.
Beyxerrz ce. tHe Kiaxoxan Derexce asp Pay Derartest.
This was a resumed sitting of a Court constituted under the provisions of Article 17 of the Tientsin Treaty of 1858 and Section 2, Sub-section 3, of the Chefoo Convention 1876, to enquire into the claim by Messrs. Bennertz and Ca. against the Kiangnan Defence and Pay Department.
Mr. H. P. Wilkinson, with whom was Mr, _E. Nelson (Messrs Johnson, Stokes and Master), appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. W. V. Drummond for the defendants.
Upon the Court assembling, Mr. Wilkinson said he desired to add a few words to what Mr. Nelson so ably sai to the Court on the last occasion. As regarded the merits of the case purely from a commercial standpoint, the first point the plaintiffs would prove was that charter money was paid ina great part before one of the steamers was taken over, and this would he proved by compradore orders. On the other side he believed there was some contention about a loan to the plaintiffs, but in no sense was it " loan from the Department, and if it were a private loan it had nothing to do with the present case.
The Taotai remarked that he should like to have the petition and all the documents in the case put in in Chinese, as he could not follow very well the English documents.
Mr. Wilkinson was under the impression that the translation of the petition had been furnished through the British Consulate.
Sir Nicholas Hannen said he had no recollection of giving orders to that effect, and, indeed, he did not think he should do so unless a request were made to hu.
Mr. Drummond said a Chinese version of the defendants' answer had been furnished to the Taotai, and it was quite evident he could not follow the case unless the petition were in Chinese.
Wilkinson said he took it the official version of the documents supplied by himself and Mr. Drummond would be the English.
Mr. Drummond strongly objected. The Court was a Chinese Court and the pleadings must be in Chinese.
Mr. Wilkinson said he took it it was a sort of glorified Mixed Court, where the pleadings were in English.
After some further discussion it was arranged the documents should be translate ed into Chinese, but that meanwhile the case should proceed.
Mr. Wilkinson said the explanation of the alleged loan was this. The expectant Taotai Chu had monetary relations with Messrs. Bennertz & Co.'s compradore and, if he liked, those could be gone into. When the trouble arose, putting aside why it arose, there were two proper courses open to the Department. One was to institute a suit in the British Supreme Court, and if they did not like to do that they could have been satisfied with diplomatic representations. The latter course was commenced by a visit to Mr. Jamieson, but then given up apparently, for the Department resorted to force. Evidence would be given that even before all the ships were handed over there were threats of force by the Department.
The Taotai observed that it would be better if the case were embodied in. documents in Chinese.
Mr. Wilkinson asked Mr, Tsai to bear with him a few minutes. Continuing, the learned counsel said the Ningchow was sent to Hongkong because the Department had made illegal threats of arrest. He did not wish to say anything more than necessary but he must point out that the use of the Imperial Maritime Customs as! the agents for any particular branch of the service, acting merely as their agents, and doing what they were told, was not likely to increase the usefulness of the Maritime Customs even as security for loans. As regarded the u: of the gun boats, the act was utterly indefensible. It was well for the Department and for China that the British Consulate considered the affair ina judicial spirit. It was only a technicality in British law that the British flag was not flying on the steamers at the time, as the charter party provided that Bennertz & Ca. could fly any flag they iked. For the indefensible act of putting the gunboats there he contended that the plantifls were entitled to the Tls. 50,000 they claimed as damages. Turning to the commercial side of the case, the learned counsel urged that when the Kiangning was seized Bennertz & Ca. actually had a credit with the Department of over Tls. 19,000, made up of Tls. 7,000 charter money, and Tls. 12,000 for repairs. Even supposing the contention about the loan to be correct, the Department still owed Bennertz & Ca. more than three times the amount of the alleged loan. In conclusion, if Bennertz & Ca. owed the Department any money the claim should have been brought in
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.