Shanghai, 18th January. Before Sir Hiram S, WitKINBox, Chief Justice.
Tune Ta, Hone Yugn, Taino Chane, Tone-cagona, and Vow CHEANc Banas " Tax Onaurerep, Baxk oF
Inpa, AvstRatta, and Oxrva, Lo.
(Continued.)
Mr. Platt said he now proposed to argue as to whether plaintiffs did give edit to defendants as they said they did. Now in this connection none of the' witnesses had said that they. would not have lent money to the compradore.
His Lordslip remarked that in the Sassoon case both the Consul and the Chief Justice were satisfied that plaintiffs would not have given credit to the compradore. The contentions in that case were perfectly consistent: The plaintiffs would probably not have given any credit if it had only been in the compradore's name, In the present case hho thought that the fact that the compradore had that position in the bank weighed considerably with the plaintiffs.
Counsel said he was trying to show that it was not improbable that credit was. in fact given-to the compradore. Here was a man who had been compradore of the bank for twenty years. Ho must hav good position in the Chinese mercan: community. The evidence sowed that he had a largejinterest in a coal business, amounting to Tls. 20,000, and not one of the plaintiffs' claims amounted to more than Tls. 20,000. It therefore was not' utterly. improbable thst credit should have been given to the compradore by the native banks. There was another small point and that was that the plaintiffs alleged that the compradores of foreign banks had authority from their principals to borrow. The witnesses were asked several times how they knew this, but they only reiterated that they know that it was so. They could not give any reasons for knowing. They simply. assumed that the compradores had authority. Counsel further wished to draw his Lordship's attention to the difference between the loans to the Way Foong and Makalee banks by the Tung Ts bank. The Way Foong loan was only entered in the way it was because the note was so worded. Both loans were considered as loans to the foreign banks. The Makalee note did not have the wor Chan fang' (counting house), but what took their place was the An Chee chop or private chop of the compradore of Makrlee. Therefore both notes were issued for the compradore's department of said foreign bank and the compradore alone was responsible for them. Counsel now wished to draw attention to the evidence of Wan Sung-teo, cashier of the Tsing Chang bank which lent money to Way Foong. He said that he received promissory note payable at the end of the 12th moon. The compradore was dealt with because the note given was a compradore's note, but this did not appear in the books. This man said that he dealt with Makalee because the notes; had Makaleo on them. {t was for his Lordship to say whether the witness was justified in so doing when the note bore the th Chee chop. The case of Fow Chang Hong seemed to be the same. Although the entries wore in the name of the foreign hong the banks looked to the compradore for payment. All this went to prove that in this case also the credit given was to the compradore. The only case the plaintiffs had against the defendants was founded on the use of the oblong chop on the promissory notes. In this respect 1 jar to that of suid that this chop was the bank's chop and that it was entrusted by the bank the compradore. The only evidence of this was that given by Zee Siang-ching, manager of the Tung Ta bank who said that on all occasions when loans were effected and they got this chop the loans wore effected by the compradore. That was all the evidence there was on this joint.
His Lordship said that if that was evidence there was plenty of it. The plaintiffs all wanted this chop and, as Counsel said, that was against him so far as it wert. That evidence ran right through the case, but it could not be depended upon us evidence on this point. They could take it as clear that when the compradore bor rowed for the bank be used the same kind of note as when he was borrowing for himself. There was no getting away from the point that on certain occasions the compradore did borrow for the bank. It was the same with Sassoon's. His Lordship had no doubt that on certain occasions their compradore used his chop very properly.
Mr. Platt said that he now came to his last point. The shroff stated in his evidence that he did tell the native bank shroffs that the money was wanted for the coal business. It did not seem probable that the shroff did so, however. The shroffs were in the habit of gathering together to talk about matters, and there was no doubt that they knew what the financial position of the bank was. There was also no doubt that during these months money was being loaned out by the bank, the shroff's book showed that.
His Lordship said that they could not Iny much stress on what the shroff said. He believed that the shroffs did gather together in the compradore's quarters, that if there was plenty of money in the bank they would know it.
Mr. Platt read certain entries in the shraf's book of loans to native banks. The book, he said, was kept by the bank's shroff. The book showed that on the 21st of November 1902 Tls. 20,030.80 was out on short loans to native banks. The evidence then did not seem to make it so improbable that the circumstances being such as: they were the shroffs meoting'as they did, that they know that the money was not wanted for the bank's purposes, though it was also not improbable that they did not tell their employers this as they should have done.
At this stage the Court adjourned until 10.30 a.m. next day.
19th January.
On resuming, Mr.' Platt said that he now only proposed to deal with the defendants' evidence. The evidence was brief. It showed that there was a ower of attorney in favour of two foreign employees of the bank. It gave no power of substitution.
His Lordship asked if every clerk in each bank here who signed for the bank and engaged the bank by acknowledging deposits etc., had a power of attorney.
Platt said he did not know.
His Lordship said that probably Counsel had a pass book. He did not expect the manager, sub-manager, or accountant, to sign it for every deposit.
Mr. Platt said. that he would not in a simple matter like that, His Lordship said he did not wish these things to be carried on too far.
Mr. Platt said that he only brought forward these points together. He did upon any single one in particular, The evidence showed that the compradore's duties were to pay the bank's obligations from monies entrusted to him for the purpose. When money was paid into the bank it was first handed to the compradore to seo if was correct or not. The compradore was answerable for the touch of gold, silver, bullion, and coins, and he was also there to advise the agent. Both the foreign agents said that the compradore had no authority to sign documents or to borrow money for the bank, or to uso their chops. They never knew that he did His Lordship thought that ho had better dispose of any of these points as they stood by themselves. It appoarto him only fair to say now, that when man came into an establishment of that kind which had been going on for years, he was not supposed to know everything. Things, to a certain extent, went on as they had done before, and in this case certain things had been going on for long time, which were known to the Chinese but not to the foreigners. The
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.