This was ition presented by Mr. Ronald Macleod, on behalf of the petitioner. for the appointment of a new trustee of a Jot of land registered in the books of the Land Office of H.B.M.'s Consulate as Lot No. 201 B sub-register No. 265 held under a declaration of trust in the name of Robert C. D. Moffat, deceased dated the 29th day of October, 1868, The said Robert C. D. Mofiat died on the 9th day a New Trustee of the said land.
His Lordship said that the property in question originally belonged to a widow, who had two sons. One of these sons was dead, but there was nothing to show that he had not left children who would be entitled to share the property with the other son, the present petitioner.
Mr. Macleod called Chang Sao-ju, who, after being warned, stated that he had collected rents for the petitioner for 19 years past, and this property was one of those feom which he collected and paid over to Chu. Hi Chn's behalf, paid the Municipal His Lordship adjourned th die for the production of a ce Wy, District Magistrate, ax to whether Chu Twe-chang is entitled alone to the property or whether the other son's children are not entitled to half the interes Shanghai, 10th February.
Before F. 8, A. Bornst, Esq..
Acting Chief J
Morte This was a motion by Ernest and Frederick Major to restrain A. G. Algar from dealing with the title of a certain plot of land.
Mr. R Macleod appeared on behalf of tai' deed. the ph s, and Mr. F. Ellis for the do- 4nd fendant.
Mr. Macleod handed in two affidavits to the Court bearing upon the issue.
His Lordship pointed out the existing custom in Shanghai where title deeds to land were concerned. He said that if the Taotai, who was the territorial agent, gave a title to a piece of land he was supposed to investigate the rights of ssu title. He guaranteed the land, and the title given by him destroyed the previous title of the Chinese, which was wiped out and the new title established. If there wax dispute as to what the title said, it could be conducted either in a Chinese Court of lave, or through the diplo: channel. But it was no use asking him to do anything which would throw doubt on the Taotai's deed. If counsel for the plaintiffs showed that he had taken steps to secure redress in a Chinese Court or through the diplomatic channels and that the matter was pending or under representation, then he could come there and ask for an injunction against Mu. Algar.
Mr. Macleod said that it was intended to take all these steps.
His Lordship said that Mr. Macleod was entitled to xo on and show that his clients were entitled to an injunction.
Mr. Macleod replied that all he wanted is an injunction.
is submitted that the plaintiffs had no right to come there and apply cither for a restraining order or an interim injunction before they had filed a petition.
His Lordship said that the rule was laid down that before any relief was sought for an interim injunction could be obtained for twenty-four hours.
Mr. Macleod said that he should have filed a petition, but his Lordship stated that action must be taken first: before the Chinese authorities.
His Lordship remarked that the jurisdiction in this Court would not depend upon the action being taken to another Court. The plaintiffs would merely demand that the land should not be transferred. He thought an injunction could be granted for twenty-four hours to give time to institute a suit.
'Mr. Ellis did not think that appeared in the Rules. Rule 26 distinctly provided that ang claim which involved goods, money, or property to the value of $100 should' be commenced by the filing of a petition.
'Mr. Macleod contended that he could obtain an interim injunction' pending the hearing of a motion of injunction.
His Lordship thought the practice in cases of injunction had certainly been that the plaintiff came into Court and obtained an injunction for twenty-four hours to give bim time to institute a suit. After that he came in on his petition and asked for a continuation of the injunc-
he mn. Such had always been the practice Mr. Ellis said that ho was not aware t, but he must submit to the raling of his Lordship in the matter. In the recent waist the "North-China Daily he thought, the counsel engaged plaintiffs was informed that he would have to filo his petition before he applied for an injunction.
His Lordship referred to Rule 179, dealing with "summary orders before suits.
Mu, Ellis said his contention was that if the plaintiffs required anything in the form of a restraining order they must satisfy the Ce that they hada case which way likely to succeed when the further proceedings were commenced.
After further argument, his Lordship said that there was no doubt but that there must be some basis for titles in Shanghai, and that it must be the Tao-If there was not such a basis, trinsic difficulties of the situation, there would be a hopeless state of confusion. That basis constituted the only solid thing there was in the question. cation was. afterwards made by his Lords! that Mr, Alwar should give an undertaking for tivo months that he would not deal with his title to this land, Mu. Ellis urged that Mr. Algar could not give such an undertaking unless the plaintiffs agreed to pay any damages he might sustain by such action doing that This portion of land held by Mr. Alar was a portion of a lot of land held in the name of Mr. Hanson.
His Lordship reminded Mr. Ellis that the suit had to be in a Chinese Court.
Mz. Ellis mentioned that it might ro-solve itself into this, that Mr. Algar might take proceedings against Mr. Hanson for damages.
Lordship said there was a case ing in the Chinese Court. If Mr. Macleod filed a petition here in sequence of this there should be an junction for a reasonable time against Mr. Algar. If there was a prime facie case to be made out, Mr. Macleod was entitled to make it.
In the course of further argument, Mr. Ellis stated that the title to this land was first transferred from Mr. Kingsmill to Mr. Hanson. The title was investigated, and Mr, Hanson applied that a now title should be issued. The matter, Mr. Ellis presumed, was looked into at the time the Chinese authorities, and a title deed was issued from the British Consul to Mr. Algar.
His Loniship said that it might be that Mr. Algar was without blame in the matter. and if the injunction had to be granted securing—might have to be given.
Mr. Macleod said that would be if the plaintiffs did-not succeed in establishing their claim. They only paid damages to Mr. Alvar if they were not successful. they were successful they would not pay the damages.
His Lordship explained that Mr. Algar wax in the position of a third party. the plaintiffs showed that Mr. Algar was connected with the fraud the position would be altered, but at present, as far as he could see, if the plaintiffs secured an injunction for six months he would infer that Mr. Algar was holding his third part for {le convenience of the
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.