Opening the case for the Crown, Mr. Hartopp first read to the Registrar, Mr. C. H. Haines, Section 44 of the Hongkong Ordinance 1932 pointing out that it default was in compliance with the section, every director, manager, or officer, who was knowingly a party to the default would be liable to a fine not exceeding $500 for everyday after the default continued.
The case for the Crown, he said, was that 403 shares were allotted on or before—it was not quite clea: whether it was on or before—May 17, 1035 and that no return of these allot ments was filed with the Rogistraof Companies within a specified period until as late as October 8, nearly six months afterward when the Registrar Companies had no power to accent Drawing attention to the word knowingly" Mr. Hartopp argued that meant contravention with knowledge of the facts. A director of a company, he said, could not escape liability by pleading ignorance of the law.
"Now Sir," he continued, "there have been numerous occasions in the past in which there has been failure to comply with this section of the Ordinance, in which application hus been made to the Supreme Court for extension of time in relief of penalty. There has usually been @ good reason given for such extension. In this case the Crown feels there has been a very glaring neglect and, T think it Is true (o say, that the Registrar Companies is tired of being ashet to nurse people and do their work for them. It is felt that this is a case where action should be taken and action has been taken."
Mr. C. R. Lee, Depuiy Registrar of Companies, called to give evidence said that on May 21 he received letter from. the secretary of the Jewellers Ca., Lid, giving certain particulars of share allotments. October 8, he received a letter from Mr. Gregory, who slated in it "We, now find on consulting our auditors
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.