Woman Believed Missing in Bombing of Sincere Store Last Year; Death to Be Proved by Executor SCRIBED as an unprecedented case which had occurred under exceptional circumstances, a motion was brought before Judge Sir Allan Mossop, in H.M. Supreme Court for China yesterday, arising out of the will of Mr: Kwei Ch'in Pritchard, widow of a former member of the Shanghai sumed to have been killed wh:
Municipal Police, who was preen an aerial bomb burst in the Sincere Store on Nanking Road on August 23. In court it was explained that Mrs. Pritchard, who had gone shopping on that Ware and had not been seen or heard of since, had made a will appointing Robert Theodore Hartley, who died on Octóber 10, 1937, her executor, The motion, therefore, was brought by Mr. J. E. Badeley, representing Mr. Edward Gossett, executor of the will of the late Mr. Hartley and an order was asked that leave be given to swear the death of Mrs. Pritchard as having occurred on or since August 23, 1937 and that a grant of letters of administration with will annexed of the estate of Mrs. Pritchard might be made under section 162 of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925 as amended by section 9 of the Administration of Justice Act 1928 to Edward Gossett upon the filing of a petition and administrator's oath and upon proof of the due execution of the will. The motion concluded by asking that the costs of and incidental to the motion be taxed as between solicitor and client and paid out of the estate of the deceased.
Outlining his case, Mr. Badeley explained that Mrs. Kwei Ch'in Pritchard, formerly of 350 Pingliang Road, was last seen or heard of on August 23, 1937. She was the widow of a British subject, Harry Pritchard, formerly of the Shanghai Municipal Police, and later housekeeper to the late Robert Theodore Hartley, who was bed-ridden through illness for several years and resided with him at 350 Pingliang Road.
On August 21 Mr. Hartley was ey: enated from that address and taken in an ambulance to the Country Hospital where he remained until his death on October 10, 1937. On August 22 Mrs. Pritchard stayed at 214 Avenue Haig and she was given a cheque for $100 by Mr. Hartley. On the following morning, accompanied by a Chinese servant, she went out for the purpose of purchasing clothes and had not been seen or heard of since.
Mr. Hartley, continued the statement, was very friendly with Mrs. Pritchard and gave her various jewellery and presents. He also bequeathed her a substantial legacy in his will and to the best of his (Mr. Grossett's) knowledge all the property belonging to her with the exception of such sum as represented her husband's estate was received by her from him.
Mr. William Charles Johnstone, of the Public Works Dept. in a statement made on oath said that he had known the late Mr. Hartley. He normally resided in the Wayside district but on the outbreak of hostili ties had-moved to 214 Avenue Haig. On August 22, Mrs. Pritchard came to stay at that address but on Monday August 23 she did not return to the house at all. As the women residing in the Rouse were alarmed at her disappearance he went to Bubbling Well Police station to make enquiries. Nothing further, however, was heard. It was his belief that she had lost her life in the explosion at the Sincere Ca: on' Nanking Road.
A similar view was expressed by Mrs. Rosie Johnstone, of 214 Avenue Haig, who stated that on the morning of August 23 Mrs. Pritchard, accompanied by a Chinese boy, went out to buy some clothes and asked them to keep lunch ready for her. At 1 pin. on that day a bomb exploded in the Sincere Ca. and she did not return. It had since been established that the cheque for $100 had been cashed at the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation's temporary office at 1288 Bubbling Well Road during the morning of August 23, but it had not been possible to obtain any information from any one who saw or spoke to either her or the boy subsequent to that time.
Bomb Explosion Onus of Proof At 1 p.m. on that day, Mrs. Badeley continued, there was an explosion of a bomb in the Sincere Store in Nanking Road and as she did not come back to 214 Avenue Haig that night or on the following day enquiries were instituted at the Bubbling Well Police station by Mr. W. C. Johnstone. Advertisements were inserted in local newspapers on Mr Hartley's instructions.
Mrs. Pritchard left a will, stated Mr. Badeley, in which she appointed Mr. Hartley, or should he predecease her, Sub-Inspector D. Connie, of the Shanghai Municipal Police, to be her executor. In the will there was a bequest to "my ' so-edited sister known as Ah Kee." Enquiries had been made but it had been impossi-
During legal arguments connected with the case, Mr. Badeley stated in court that the case was one for which there was no precedent. The circumstances were exceptional, indeed they were very exceptional. The Judge pointed out that it would have to be shown that Mrs.
Pritchard predeceased Mr. Hartley, and Mr. Badeley's client had the onus of proving that her death took place before October 10.' He had to show not only that this person died but died before a certain date. He added that he would consider the matter and let Mr. Badeley know when he could give a decision. Mr. Victor Priestwood, Crown Advocate, appeared on behalf of the Crown. ble to locate the latter person and, og far as could be ascertained, she was not a relative of Mrs. Pritchard.
The estate left by Mrs. Pritchard consisted of about $1,000 in silver, a cash box containing various articles of jewellery, the sum of $433 in a savings bank account with the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation in the joint names of herself and the late Mr. Hartley, £237.4. 11 and $276.26 on savings bank accounts with the Hongong & Shanghai Banking Corporation, thirty $50 preference shares in the Shanghai Tug & Lighter Ca. Ltd, twenty five 6 per cent. preference shares in the Shanghai Power Ca. and $1,030 on fixed deposit with the Wing On & Ca. Ltd. and Sincere Ca. Ltd.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.