Yangteze Insce. Claim: Judgment Admitted; No Act of Indemnity A case involving Tls. 150,000] wag dealt with in three minutes in-H M.. Supreme Court on Monday, before his Honour Judge Sir' Skinner Turner, the proceedings in effect constituting a formal protest by Mr. Eric Moller against the action of the Hong. kong Government in connexion with his shipping claim.
Plaintiffs were the Yao surance Assosiation Ca., their claim was as follows:
(a)—Tls. 117,092.71" money_ Tent.
(b)—Tls. 25,324.41 agreed interest thereon at the rate of 8 per cent, po annum up to March 31, 1924, (6)—Tls, 11,418.02 the amount of insuranco'premia due from the] defendant to plaintiffs.
(d)—Tls, 4,096 money due under a letter of guarantee dated October 25, 1917.
Plaintiffs also claimed that the items (a) and (b) were due under! Jo convenant in a mortgage of the str, Lindsay Moller, dated Deo-ember 12, 1916, and/or a conven-fant of ittdentire dated June 15, 1923. was a further claim for interest at the rate of 8 per gent, upon the first item from March 31,1026, up to the data Of the writ and thereafter until judgment, Mr. H. Lipson Ward appeared for plaintiff and Mr. H. P, Wilkingon for defendant.
Mr. Ward said that the proceedings wor brought under specially endorsed writ, and.an affidavit had been filed by Mr. C. AMI. G. Burnie, general manager for plaintiffs, "supporting the claim in accordance with Rule 100. No. affidavit in reply had been filed, and counsel accordingly asked for judgment in the terms of the writ, Mr. Wilkinson, for defendant, said: The bringing of this action ireot consequence, of the commandeering of the ships of Government. is Mr, loller Moller & Ca. by the Hongkong would not, if he could, pass an fact. of indemnity reli him his liabilities," on his behalf 1 feonsent to j There is no} mate as 9 the amount, is Lordship entered judgment for plaintiffs for is, 187,896, with her dog, avery valuable animal, would not eat. Would he give fuer a lift to a compradore's shop' He did so, unfortunately for himself, and day. or two later she went to see him at his office and demanded Frs. 1,000 [because she had been in his car. He refused and sent her away. 'She came again later and he gave liber $30, all the money he had lon him,' to get rid of her. She kept on coming to see him, how. ever, and Bnally he consulted the police, After that when she came round he. sent for Det. Hunter who put the woman out of the office." He heard nothing more till she brought this case, and since to the best of Knowledge he had never even touched the dog, he refused pay. It he thought for one motment he had hurt her dog he would have pai Judgment was given for defendant with costs.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.