"Shanghai, 16th July.
Before Taotai Tsar Curiix, President of the Bureau of Foreign Affairs at Nankin and Sir Nicnoras J. Hasses, H.B.M.'s Consul-General.
Bexwenrz v. THe Kraxoxas DErexce ano Pay DEPARTMEST.
This was a resumed si ting 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 Hiiangnan Defence and Pay Department.
H. P. Wilkinson, with whom was Mr. B. Nelson (Messrs Johnson, Stokes and Master), appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. W. V. Drummond for the defendants.
Upon the Court assembling, Mr. Bennertz was further cross-examined by, MIN Drummond.
He said the first lai im he made upon the Department was at the end of July, 1896, for Tls. 9,000 or is. 10,000—he could not say exactly. The Chinese account, produced, was probably made out by one of the writers in his office, Dut it was not signed by witness, and he could not say who wrote it.
He rather thought the document was a copy, but he had not the original with him. He might be able to get it.
Mr. Drummond said he hardly saw how they could proceed that morning without the original, als he challenged almost every item in the accounts, but after some discussion the case was continued.
Mr. Bennertz said the first item in the account was for Tls. 620, on account of repairs to four ships. He did not give the details to Br. Chu because they were never Gemsnded, but they were always available and were furnished to Mr. Drummond by witness's legal adviser. Moreover, Mr. Chu aust have known about it, because the sum was included in an amount of Tls. 1,920 for repairs, entered in a document prepared by Mr. Chu's interpreter. Witness had the bills in Court and produced them. The witness was being closely questioned upon the mode in which the first claim was made up, when Sir Nicholas Hannen remarked that it seemed unfair to make the plaintiff break the order in which the vouchers had been arranged for the whole case, in order to go back to some earlier claim. He thought it would be sufficient if the vouchers asked for were simply shown to the Court and not separated from the relation they bore to the whole case.
Mr. Drammond contended that it was necessary to clear up the first stage of the case, when the parties took up definite positions, and from which other circum-Etances followed. A great part of the case depended upon the question whether the claims put in at the beginning were such as the defendants were justified in refusing to pay.
After some further discussion, Sir Nicholas Hannen withdrew his suggestion, and the detailed examination of the accounts proceeded, vouchers being called for by Mr. Drammond in respect of each entry, and being put in by the witness.
Mr. Bennertz said the original bills were not handed to Mr. Chu, but they were explained to him. According to the agreement the bills were payable by the defendants. Mr, Chu advised that the repairs should be done as cheaply as possible. The arrangement with Taotai Tseng was purely verbal and made before the signing of the contract. Prior to the vessels being handed over to the plaintiffs the officers were Chinese.
At this stage the Court rose for the day.
a 18th July.
Mr n the Court assembling, 'Drummond drew attention to paragraph 10 of the plaintiffs' petition, in which it was stated that on or about the 25th of July, 1896, they demanded $12,608 as due from the Department. He asked that a Chinese translation of the account should be handed into the Court.
Mr. Wilkinson undertook to have it done.
Mr. Drummond next applied that Chinese translations of two English documents already in should be furnished, and that all subsequent exhibits should be put in in Chinese.
The Taotai said the Court at the first sitting directed that all documents handed in must be in Chinese.
Mr. Bennertz was then examined in detail as to the details of the first claim. In regard to one item, Mr. Bennertz said the actual sum was $500, but at Mr. Chu's Ute. Drummond asked that every account nest he put it down at Tls. 500. and voucher put in should be translated into Chinese, a course which Mr. Wilkinson opposed on the ground of expense.
Sir Nicholas Hannen supported Mr. Wilkinson. but Taotai Tsai ruled that Mr. Drummond's request must be complied with.
Court at this stage rose for the day. 19th July.
Upon the Court assembling, 'Drummond said—Before we proceed with the details in this case, there are two points upon which I must ask the Court to give decision. The first one relates to this: in the defendants' case they plead in paragraph 12 "that the plaintifis made up false claims against the defendants, and endeavoured to force them to pay the claims and refused to deliver up possession of the steamers." At the beginning of the hearing of this case one of the first things decided by the Judge was that all documents put in were to be put in in Chinese. On Saturday morning I first mentioned to the Court in starting that I asked that the plaintiffs should put in translations in Chinese of exhibits 44 and 45 which were put in the day before, and translations f all the following exhibits. To this Mr.
Wilkinson agreed, and made no objection, and said he would do so as soon as possible. The case then continued until past twelve o'clock, and a large number more exhibits were put im on that understanding. Just as the Court was about to rise Sir Nicholas Hannen took the objection that that would cause a great waste of time.
Sir Nicholas Hannen—I think, Mr. Drummond, this is a further waste of time; I understood Mr. Tsai to say that they were to be put in and there is an end of it.
Mr. Drummond—Yes, but that is not the point. Then a long whispered communication from Sir Nicholas Hannen to Mr. Scott and from Mr. Scott to Mr. Tsai took place. I, of course, could not hear a word of it, but the first thing I knew was that after the communication from Scott to Mr. Tsai, Mr. Scott standing up made a remark—I cannot remember the words exactly but generally to the effect—that Mr. Tsai did not wish the whole of the exhibits to be trans-ated in detail but would be content with the names of the bills and the total amount. That, of course, was an entire upset of all my work, in putting in these detailed accounts and in getting' the decision of the Court that they should be put in entirely in Chinese. Iam informed that Mr. Tsai did not make, or at any rate did not intend to make any such decision as that. However that may be, there may have been a misunderstanding on the point. I immediately objected to that decision from Mr. Scott's lips and again required to ask for the third time that the exhibits should be put in in full detail, and the Court so decided that it should be done in that way. Now I have to protest, on behalf of the defendants, against any' communications being made to the Judge whilst sitting in this Court in a whispered tone, or in the nature of a whisper, and I'ask the Judge to decide that he will not listen to anything in the case which isnot made openly and loudly in such a way as to be heard by everyone in the Court. Isay that it is absolutely necessary for the fair trial of this case, and is what would be done in any civilised Court in the world. I therefore ask the Judge to say that he will not listen to any farther communications except such as are spoken out loud and in the hearing of everyone in the Court.
Sir Nicholas Hannen—Before we go any farther, Mr. Drummond, do you mean to say that you would object to Mr, Tsai and myself retiring to discuss any matter Mr. Drummond—That is the second matter Iam comi Sir Nicholas nnen—You object to that Mr. Drummond—Most strongly. That is my second point.
Sir Nicholas Hannen—Then I will leave it to Mr. Tsai to decide.
Mr. Wilkinson—Shall I reply to Mr. Drammond Sir Nicholas Hannen—I do not think it is necessary, it is for the Court to determine what its procedure should be.
Mr. Drummond—The second point is. Several days ago, after an argument upon the point of the admission of the counter-claim, and the Judge had stated his decision that everything was admissible in this Court, he was asked to retire into another room. He complied with that and retired. "What went on, of course, T know nothing about, but I am entitled to assume that arguments were then addressed to him by Sir Nicholas Hannen against the decision which he had already given, and on returning to Court the Judge decided that he would reserve the point, and that, in the meantime the plaintiffs should proceed with their case. Now, what Isubmit for the decision of the Court is that such a course as that—retiring from this open public Court after an argument, j into a private room for farther discussion
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.