Referring to Dicey, counsel said it was not necessary for an individual to intend to stay permanently. If that individual) intended to stay for an indefinite period. it was sufficient to suggest domicile. Even if he added that in the event of winning a Calcutta cash sweep he would return to England, it would not alter the presumption of domicile. Counsel proceeded to state that domicile need not be at any particular place. An individual could be domiciled in England, but not necessarily in York, and in India but not in Calcutta. The motive was indifferent. It was only a matter of choice. Petitioner had said something about staying here for his health, but what he said in regard to his business was alone sufficient for the presumption of domicile.
The intention to stay was not an intention to change his allegiance. Counsell said he wished to convince his Lordship that petitioner's intention to stay in China was not because he wished to evade his commission in the British Army. An
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.