Cotton Goods Exchange -and Brokers Jointly Sued for Ts, 53,71
An important stock exchange case was heard at the Mixed Court on Thursday morning by Mr. Martin (British Assessor) and Magistrate Yoi, when Fong Yao-kee claimed from the Chinese Cotton Goods Exchange and the Hong Yue Hong the sum of Tls. 63,71 with interest.
Plaintiff's petition stated that the first defendant was a stock exchange registered at the Mi of Ageiculture and Commerce and the second was a hong of brokers admitted and registered as the first defendant's broker numbered 64, Between October 29 and November 2 1928, plaintiff bought of the first defendant from the second 4,050 bales of cotton yarn and 2,600] Piculs of cotton in" 21" different contracts. "For the goods plainti claimed to have paid the first defendant, through the second defendant, a total margin of Tis, 32,100, besides leaving a credit balance with the defendants amounting to Tls. 2071, On November 6, 1923, the petition states, plaintiff structed the defendants' to sell his holdings at the close quotation of that day, which would have meant a profit of Tls. 19,000, but the defendants refused to pay plaintiff? this profit, together with the margin money of 'Tls. 34,771, in violation' of law and of ' the exchange's regulations, to plainti damage of Tls. 58,771 or more. The second defendant, the petition continued, had disappeared," but had deposited with the first" defendant a cash guarantee of Ts. 15,000, which the latter has refused" to hand over to plaintiff as payment, pendente lite. Repeated demands fad Geen unavailing. Whereas, PlaintifY claimed for these items, Alleged Gambling Transaction.
Tne Cotton Goods Exchange (the fiver defendant) denied these items, fad alleged that all transactions entered into by second defend. fant and recorded by them, the first defendants, have been duly carried ut and settled by the second defendant. The second defendant, the Hong Yue Hong, denied aly the plaintiffs allegations and stated that it was intended by the parties that the 4,050 bales of cotton provided that the 21 contracts 7oferred: to: in the petition were the: /same as those produced by Dr. Mel {for inspection of the first defendant prior to the tial.
The Court, after- argument, finally. ruled against Mr, Preston and ordered Dr, Mei to -proceed with: the case.
The - evidence-in-chief of the: plaintiff was then taken and the ease was adjourned and set for hearing at 2.30" p.m. on the afternoon of June 18.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.