The reply then goes on to claim that the Council is authorized by Land Regulation IX, the Proclamaffon of Tao Tai Lan of February 24, fB55. and the resolutions of meetin: of foreign ratepayers to collect land fax from all Chinese owning or occuping land in the Settlement irrespective of title. The Council then alleges that no person is entitled to demand or enjoy the benefits of municipal or public services under a franchise of the Council, unless he is a law-abiding resident who has paid or agrees to pay, all rates and taxes.
In the alternative the Council alleges that there is an implied contract between plaintiffs and them that plaintiffs are not entitled to Day aN rates and taxes for which they are liable. The Council then claims frat plaintiffs are indebted to them in the total sum of $12,968- 40 for land tax.
The case which is nearing conclugion will resume this afternoon when Mr. Paul Y. Ru, Assistant Municipal Advocate who was the first witness called by the Council at the fifth session of the case on Tuesday l will be cross-examined at length by Mr. S. Francis Liu, counsel for plain tiffs. Evidence in the case is being heard before Mr. E. A. Long. Secre! ary of the Consular Body and commissioner appointed to take evidence by the court.
'The action ís in the nature of a test case and will determine the rights or otherwise of the Council to collect land tax on fan-tan' land in the Settlement amounting to more than $1,000,000 annually.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.