Salim Mallouk, trading as Mallouk Brothers, of Now York, v. Ellis T. Pasha, managing director of Elbarol-Jderies, Shanghai, a claim for $7,000 focal" currerey, " with interest and costs, came up for a preliminary hear-Jing before Judge Milton J. Helmick jin the US, Court for China, on Monday, Dec. 16. Mr. F. J. Schuhl appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. P. Faison for the defendant, Mr, Matouk, agent for Mallouk' Bro: hers Ju Shanghai, appeared fact for Salim Mallouk.
The petition stated that, on August }30, 1932, at New York, defendant made a certain promissory note Promising to pay $7,000 to plaintifis, within 24 months at 25 Central Road, Shanghai, for value received. This. note became payable on August 29, 1934, but no part of the sum had been paid, 'A counterclaim and set-off was led by defendant, alleging that he had paid $3,500 on account of the Inote "sued on, and, consequently, Jdenying the allegation. The counter-Jclaim further alleged that during} [September and October, 1933, plain-gave definite orders for the manufacture of certain lace articles jsccording to special designs prepared by plaintiff, for delivery within a reasonable time on a cost plus 7% per Jcent of cost basis. The said articles had been manufactured, but, while plaintiff had accepted delivery and paid for the major portion of these articles, he had refused, in broach lof his order, to accept delivery and pay for a number of the articles. Defendant claimed $519.02, lof his claim, over plaintlfr Interest and costs.
An answer to. this counterelsim Aled: by plaintiff denied that plaintiff had given the ceder alleged, and stated that plaintiff had no knowledge whether defendant had manufactured the articles mentioned. The answer also contained a denial that plaintiff had committed any breach of contract, or that he had caused any damage to defendant.
In his evidence, Mr. Pasha stated that he had had extensive experience fof the lace business, both in New. 'York and in Shanghsi, He had been doing business with plaintift_ since 1930, and the system was that Mr. Sahakian, plaintiffs former" representative' in Shanghai, who had since died, issued orders to defendant for lace goods. Various orders. for these goods wore issued in August, September, and October, 1933, and there was one verbal order given when plaintiff was away at Chefoo. On his return, he gave orders for to his wife. I know of no recorded case, and counsel have not been able to point one out to me, where a subquent document has been construed trust within Section IL"
In the appropriation form, "Mrs, Benjamin was only named, and was only to benefit, in the event of the assured failing' to file a written de-Claration with the company assigning the benefits to some other person or persons, Ho was therefore of the opinion that the first question before him was to be answered in the negative.
With regard to the property in Vu Yuen Road, he quoted several letters from Mr, Benjamin to his wife in which the deceased always referred to it os "your property." Mrs. Benjamin had further testified that she had conducted all negotiations for the sale of the land, and that all offers for itz purchase came to her. She had further been in consultation with architect for the demolition of the present premises and the erection of fan apartment house in its place. He had no doubt the law quoted bs Mr. MeNeill was correct, but the evirience owes, "He went away with $5000 tytn Hersberg and Miss Walker supported Mrs. Walker's account of her vcauest to the shroff. The latter, Called in rebuttal, refuted this sory. SThey were iyine." he said.
Referring his Lordship to the law Jon the subject, Bir. Brown submitted fat at the laiest the cheque should Ihave been presented for payment by ft'pm, on May 23. He had looked rough Stroud's legal dictionary for 2 definition of "reasonable time." but twas only able to tind the following "Tt would be Unreasonable to expect a definition of reasonable."
submitted: that payment to an Jagentin the present case, 0 shrof—was the same as payment to principal, and possession by the agent iwas tantamount to possession by the principal. Mr, McNeill however, that although that might be contended, the prosecution, on Friday.
John Vincent Hourihat Shanghel Fire Brigade Hongkew, stated that, as a result of 2 lelephene call from the Hongkew police station, at 3.12 am. on December I, ko west in an ambulance to a spot in Fearon Road mid-way between! Haining and Yuhang roads, where Chinese man was lying on' the read, Unconscious." His clothes "were wel, land he was shivering and unconscious. Hig. clothes. immediately were removed, he was wrapped in blanket, fend taken to St. Luke's hospital.
Probationary Sergt. Join. Deavill. attached to. the Kashin Road police! Station, said that, at S am. on the morning of December 3, Insp. Bennett detailed him to go to Honghew creek, ear East Yuhang Road bridge and watch the results of the dragging of the creek by the River Police. Went with a Chinese constable of the, this order to be carried out, by his agents at Chefoo, the Eureka Com-any. He delivered 100 scart sels which had been o: dered to Mallouk Brothers' agent in September, 1034. JSome of these were accepted, and some rejected. Witness then went to) Chefoo and tried to cancel as many. of the goods as he could. He did not finish the orders, as he thought he might have to pay for the remainder of them. He hod been manufacturing orders for Mallouk Brothers since 1990 on 2 7% per cent ut since 1933, plaintiffs had begun to refuse to accept the consign=rente, Defendant said that, afier the goods had been rejected, he made unsuccess. {ul attempts to sell ther. in Shanghai He also obtained an offer from an American firm for 60 and 70 per cent. of the total cost. the general rule, and would doubtless River 'Police. After' the dragoing Cross-examined, defendant said he apply where a payment of actual operations had been in force about 20 went to New York in August, 1032, money was made, it did not' apply minutes, he noticed the constable con-where he visited Mallouk' Brother here as the shroff had merely received Versing with a Chinese woman, and gave them promissory notes in tniurse, and which hed tobe bros After a few minutes the oonsable 1084, Be paid them §2000 in order bill of exchange which he could not five minutes later, witt a Chinese man. Purchase of trade. In September, to save the notoriety of the later' paid in a further amount. Mr. Matouk said be would try to. persuade Mollouk Brothers to accept the goods in question. He had completed a part of the orders, and this was the part he had sot out in the counterclaim, He had since shipped the major portion of the goods Los Angeles, but denied that he had Jdone this in order to avoid the Inspection of the goods by the Court, He did not hold them in Shanghai because Mr. Matoule had orders not to accept anything from him. He denied that he had tampered with the dates on the invoices relating to the goods, nor had anyone else in his office.' He had sold a small Jquantity of the goods locally at retail prices. Mr. Malloule paid a visit to /Shanghal in the early par: of 1934, jand on that occasion he declared he Would "break" defendant at any cost.
After two other witnesses had been called, the ease was adjourned, [Action for Return of Share Price A suit for the return of Sh.
}$51,000, shares invested In the Asia Electric Ca. Me, and interest, drought by Edward G. Whittaker and Evelyn L. Whittaker against the Asia Electric Company and Mr. Truman Johnson, the president and 1 director of the company, was heard the US. Court for China on Tuesday, Dee. 16, before Judge Milton J. Helmick, Mr. Myson Werner appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr.
Allman for the defendants, The petition stated the authorized capital of the defendant company was Sh. $200,000. On the official records of the defendant com-any the names of the complainants were registered as the joint owners of 5,000 shares, for which they pald $50,000, and og the legal owners of 100 other shares, as trustees for their children, for which $1,000 was paid. The' purchase of such shares, was" alleged was induced through the fraudulent conceal ment of facts, and by false statements made' by defendants to. gether with directors and officers of the company, who, when discovered. complainants' desired -should be entered as defendants, Tu April, 1032, it was alleged, Mr. Johnson solicited shares from plainffs, and in so doing' fraudulently stated that the company was finan-dally sound, and that he was the owner of $25,000 worth of shares, for which he had pald cash." On August 8, 1935, the complainants: first discovered the alleged fraud, and demanded the return of the Purchase price of the shares, plus interest, but defendants had faile to do this.
The defence denied that Mr, Jobnson had fraudulently solicited from complainants by false ments, The company had no information as to statements alleged to have been made by Mr. Johnson, and therefore denied the same. They admitted that complainants purchased '5.000 shares, and pald $50,000 for them, Mr, Edward Whittaker, one of th complainants, was a director of the company, an the secretary, and the company's balance shoot was discussed and approved by him at the annual meetings of the directors in 1932, 1933, in 1934, Evidence was" given by Mrs. Whittaker, Mr. Whittaker, and Mr, A. St. Lewis before the hearing was adjourned, Filipino Who Stabbed a Russian A. saxophone player who carried Jo knife to sharpen his reed, and used to defend himself when attacked by a bigger man wns sentenced to six months" imprisonment by Judge Milton J. Helmick in the U.S, Court for China on Thursday. Inasmuch as the has been detained in gaol for a [period of nearly two months awaiting the court ordered that his sentence dete from the time of his Bienvenido Bantog, 28-year old Filipino, pleaded guilty to a charge of simple assault on L. Savchenko fon October 22. Asked by the court why a charge of an assault with a knife had not been brought, Mr. Felthan Watson, U.S. District Attorney, said that the complaining witness had diMeulty in identifying the man who had assaulted him. Bantog, however, subsequently made a statement to friends. and to the Police that he had assaulted Sav-Jchenko. That was why the charge, as framed, had been brought.
The facts, continued the District Attorney, Were simple. About two months ago, the defendant and a friend, A. Andarana, were outside the Venus Cafe. In an argument over some dancing girls, Bantog stabbed Savchenko with a knife. The latter was taken to the General Hospital, fom which he was released about Jo week a0.
Addressing the court on his client's behalf, 'Mr. Myron Wiener said that Bontog had pleaded guilty on his Jadvice, although a plea of not guilty' might have been entered on the grounds of self-defence. In view
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.