The plaintiff, Chai Yue-ching, was] first called to give evidence and said that he carried on business under number of names, one of which was Wai Ho-tong, as on the insurance; He had known the Com-Union Insurance Ca. for about four years, having been introduced through a shroff. He had taken out policies through the agents of the insurance com: pany, Messrs. Harrisons, King Trwin, Ltd, at Hankow, on three properties, one of which, the godown in question, he had insured for Tls. 4,500. These Policies he had renewed on March 8, 1927, and paid the premiums in person to a member of the com. pradore staff of Messrs. Harrisons, King & Tewin on March 11. He} paid in dollars and bank notes the sum of $312.39, the exchange being' 71.125. He obtained a receipt and the compradore chopped the chit book when the money was paid, During the trouble in Hankow all his papers were lost and destroyed, the; receipt and the chit book being, among those lost. He was in Shanghai at the time of the fire Lut when he went back to Hankow he saw Mr. John F. Chu, of the agents' firm, and asked when the claim would be paid. Mr. Chu telegraphed to Shanghai and about one week Inter witness had a telephone message asking him to bring round the policy, which he did. He was offered cheque for Tls. 4,006.16 on the Chung Foo bank but he refused Because the regulations laid down by Mr. T. V. Soong for the Government in control had caused a depreciation in the notes of this bank.
Mr. McDonald read a copy of the regulations which appeared in the "People's Tribune" dated April 19, which prohibited the exportation of cash from Hankow. The notes of the Central Bank, the Bank of China and the Bank of Communications; were to be used for paying taxes and making cash transactions, although notes of other banks might be exchanged for these. Anyone refusing the notes or circulating rumours would be severely dealt with.
'The regulations the plaintiff held were only' enforceable between Chinese. Other dealers had been paid by foreigners either on a cash basis or by cheque on a for~ eign bank. The Chung Foo banknotes, he were worth about one-fifth their face value, but later they rose to a little over half.
Cross-examined, the plaintiff said that the policies hud not been lost because they had been Kept in the Settlement, He had no knowledge that a member of his staff, one Liu ing, whom he knew, had been office on July 4, and surance In giving his premium on the
evidence the plaintiff had said that the defendants had offered to pay him in cash at five per cent. discount, but he had refused the offer because Mr. Chu had asked for Tls. 600 as he had arranged the cash payment. This he said, when questioned by Mr. Harris, he had not reported to anyone as he had immediately after placed the matter in the hands of his lawyers, Messrs. Bally & Perry.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.