The President of such Court holds such an important post, that he received his appointment specially from the President of the Republic of China, according to Article 1 of the Ordinance of Ranks and Grades of Judicial officials, and according to "Article 95 of the Law of Organization of the Judiciary, ho has the authority to unify the interpretation of the law but he haa no power to direct the Judges og to how they shall try or decide a case. The result of the explana~ tions of the Supreme Court at Nan. King a rogarda the armed robber clause is, in my opinion, disastrous to the safety of the Chinese and foreign residents of the Inter national Settlement of Shanghai, 'The property had been under the control of the Peking government the time it was destroyed. Then afterwards, the Nationalist Army' had taken possession of the premises with the buildings in ruins for Which they now sought, indemnity. The loss had been sustained by the holder of the policies, which was obviously the Peking' government. The Nationalist Government had not lost anything.
However, the question before the court was not, who suffered the loss, but, under the ple whether or not the government had capacity United States Court. Citations by defendant precluded any doubt that a de facto government could for come into an American court unless it were a government recognized by the United States. In China, the United States Court, so far as its polyers to recognize laintiff's right to suit, was on no different footing than a court in any part of the United States. As soon 485 the Nationalist Government was recognized by the U. S. Government it would have power to sue in the veal American court.
am bound by these decisions to sustain the plea in abatement and dismiss plaintiff's point of action."
Tix Honour asked in conclusion that defendants' counsel should prepare an order to this effect, and the caw adjourned at 12.45 pin,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.