Your search within this document for 'supreme' resulted in 17 matching pages.
1

“...85 of the said Order in Council, Given under my hand and Seal this 14th day of June, 1867. RUTHERFORD ADCOCK, H. B. M ’s Supreme Court. II. B. M.’s SUPREME COURT FOR CHINA & JAPAN. NOTICE.—It is hereby notified that the sittings of the Court for hearing Civil cases during the month of July next:, will be held on Wednesdays, the,'Wand days of that month respectively; and for Motions, Ap- plications, &c., onNafoWoy/a, /Zig and The Vacation will commence on the le and terminate on the I5Z/z Repfemhet' 1867» during winch period the Supreme Court will hold no sittings tor the transaction of ordinary business, Shanghai, 21st June, 1867, IN HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY’S SUPREME COURT FOR CHINA & JAPAN. THE BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1861. Shanghai, 26th June, 1867. EREAS a petition for an adjudication of bank- ruptcy was, on the 25M day of June 1867, filed in Her Britannic Majesty’s Supreme Court for China and Japan, at Shanghai, by Edmund Warden, under which he has been adjudged bankrupt, Notice is hereby given...”
2

“...SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. French Consulate General. PUBLIC AUCTION. TRIBUNAL CONSULAIRE DE FRANCE A SHANGHAI. AVIS. DE deux Jugements rendus en mati&re de faillite le 25 Juin, 1867, il rtsulte que M. Nachtrieb ne- gociant demeurant a Shanghai a 6t4 nomm6 syndic de lafaillite Vaucher Freres de Shanghai, et que M. Millot negociant demeurant egalement a Shanghai, a nomme syndic de la faillite Ninaud & Cie., tous deux en remplacement de Mr. E. Borel d&nissionnaire. Pour extrait certify conforme et, par ordre du Tri- bunal. Le greffier, HEBRARD, Four legalisation de la signature de M. Hebrard, Le Consul General, Vte. BRENIER DE MONTMORAND. Shanghai, le 26 Juin, 1867. British Consulate Shanghai. NOTIFICATION No. 18. BY order of Sir R. Alcock K. C. B., H. B. M.’s Minister Plenipotentiary, the following appoint- ments and changes having reference to this Consulate, take effect from the ls£ of July 1867. Mr. Vice Consul Markham proceeds as Acting Consul to Chinkiang to take charge of the...”
3

“...June 29 th 1867. SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. 313 It is requested that only such communications as that they Editorial matters be addressed to the Editor, and relate to be sent not later than Friday. Advertisements will be received till 10 a.m. on Saturday. No communications can be noticed unless accompanied by the name of the writer. Supreme dmrrt nni) Consular fceite Shanghai, June 29th, 1867. The “ Min. ” case, heard in the Supreme Court at Hongkong before the Chief Justice and a Special Jury consisting of five merchants and two bill brokers, after occupying the Court for four days, terminated in an unanimous verdicb in favour of the Plaintiffs, the Comptoir d’Es- compte and the Chartered Bank of India, who sued the Defendants, the owners of the ship “ Min,” for wrongful conversion of certain goods, the bills of lading for which they (the Plaintiffs) allege, had been assigned to them for valuable consideration before the unpaid vendors of the goods in question exercised their right...”
4

“...314 SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. June 29 th 1867 ceive that there was abundant evidence to es- tablish Lyall, Still & Co.’s insolvency and there was sufficient evidence before the Court to have irresistably led the jury to the conclusion, that the Plaintiff’s agents, as reasonable men, must have certainly known of such insolvency. It is the policy of our Law to prevent the appro- priation of one person’s property towards pay- ment of another’s debts, and therefore only in cases where the indicia of property such as bills of lading, are transferred by endorsement, or otherwise in the ordinary course of business, bona fide and for valuable consideration, and without notice that the transferer had not paid for the same, or is in insolvent circum- stances, will such endorsement be held good and defeat the right of the unpaid vendor to stop in transitu ; and this is a principle in aid of com- merce. It is equally clear, however, that when there is collusion, or a taint of bad faith, such...”
5

“...June 29th 1867. SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. 315 venue. It is thus necessary to take some gene- rally required commodity as a security for the payment of the tax, or in other words, to resort to indirect taxation. Fortunately in Shanghai we are not called upon to take into very deep consideration the likelihood of any popular discontent; and in the arrangements for our little local revenue we may be safe in leaning towards that system of taxation, which is likely to secure the best atten- tion being paid to public affairs and to economy in expenditure. Nevertheless a fact of some significance brought to notice at the last Land Renter’s meeting shewed that even in a place comparatively so small as Shanghai the same principles as those above noticed have their force and application. The increasing magni- tude of the particular form of direct taxation which is of most importance in Shanghai, name- ly the House Tax, called forth some animad- version even from so phlegmatic a body as the...”
6

“...316 SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. June 29th L867- agreed to charge no more than what it cost me. I charged for 25 days’ feed in April, and 22 days’ in May. The horse is still at my stable. II do not wish to charge Mr. Groom after that date. The bill was first sent in for April. Payment was refused as being at Tls. 20 in lieu of Tls. 18 per month. It is at the rate of Tls. 18 per month. Rather than have a dis- pute, I reduced the charge to dollars. I called upon Mr. Groom and told him I did not want to make a profit on the horse and would make no [charge for the sixteen geese. Mr. Groom kept my bill and sent me an order for Tls. 69. The total purchase was Tls. 119. Cross-examined by Defendant.—I told Mr. Groom that Mr. Ferguson had 12 pigsties complete and these I had purchased at auction. I said that ^thought the whole of the material was there. Mr. Groom made arrange- ments to leave the geese in my place till he was ready to receive them, but I did not agree to take charge of the pigsties...”
7

“...June 29th 1867. SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. 317 purchase that the flooring was useless. Mr. Ferguson (to the Court.) I should imagine 16 geese would eat 4 pels, barley a month. The price of barley was agreed to be $ 2 per picul. His Lordship held that the pigstyes being found to be defective, the Plaintiff could not maintain his action for the price of them ; That, having refused to deliver up the horse and cart, he must also fail in the demand for payment ; that consequently he could not recover for the keep of the horse; that the wheelbarrow having been delivered must be paid for ; and that the geese which the Plaintiff was ready to deliver must also be paid for, together Tls. 19. That the cost of the feed of the geese must be paid for by Defendant, amounting to $ 22 for the three months, less a week, during which the geese had been kept. H. B. M.’s SUPREME COURT, SUMMARY CASES. Before R. A. Mowat Esq. June 25th 1867. MartinusLuteyav. Capt. Towers of the Water Lily. This was a claim...”
8

“...318 SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. June 29 tk 1867 be an elementary rule laid down in the most elementary books we have, that a partnership, though it may have as many branches under as many styles throughout the world as it likes, is still but one partnership, so that persons in dealing with Lyall and Still in London, are substantially dealing with Lyall, Still & Co. of Hong- kong. Now there is another view of the matter which goes to simplify the points in issue in this case. I lay down the broad principle, that ^notice to one partner is notice to all—the act of one partner is the act of all, and it is immaterial under whose name the act has been done, so that the firm itself understands it was the act of the firm. These points must, I think, gentlemen, be taken for granted. I am obliged to tell you what the law is, and it is your duty (I don’t say it with disrespect) it is your duty to take it from me. Well then, this being so, what is proved in this case ? The order by Lyall, Still...”
9

“...June 2§th 1867. SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. 319 a doubt of Lyall, Still & Co., and we have heard a good deal of that, they had ’their option, and could have protected themselves in this way. They could have affixed to each bill of lading something that would have amounted to ’actual notice, but that they did not do. And it was said in another case, Kay v. Coatsworth—it was there sa:d if you wanted to protect yourselves, you should have done as in Barrow v. Coles, but as you did not there was no notice. Well, gentlemen, that being the case, and these bills of lading not having on the face of them any writing to create a doubt or difficulty as to the ownership of the goods,—because, whatever has been said, it has been admitted that, in appearance, Messrs. Lyall, Still & Co. were purchasers, that is admitted by the Attorney-General,—and if they were in appearance purchasers, it would seem that there was nothing remaining to suggest, or that could bring into question, the ownership of...”
10

“...320 SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. June2&tli 1867. that pressure was put, before that threat, which was to frighten any body, and although Mr. MacLean had stated to Mr. Kaye, that his firm had returned these acceptances?for $150,000 dishonored, Mr. Kaye was not put in the box to say a word about these transactions; and for anything that appears here, as far as you are concerned, it was only mentioned as a little trifling in- cident. I am satisfied, as I think you are, that both parties—Mr. MacLean and Mr. Kaye,—knew more than Mr. MacLean told you, but then Mr. MacLean was not asked on the point. What effect might have re- sulted from Mr. Kaye’s evidence, we cannot say. It follows, however, you are left in the dark ; it came to this that being so left in the dark by the plaintiffs you must come to the conclusion that both gentlemen—Kai- ser and Kaye, as represented here by Mr. Pollard,— knew of the insolvency of the firm they were dealing with. Now, then, you^will bear in mind the facts...”
11

“...June 29th 1867. SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. 321 at it with the Mate. The top was split, it appeared as if an iron had been into it, something like a chisel. Some days afterwards T saw the second case of the same mark —it appeared very nearly the same. Plaintiff.—I saw more cases broken on board, but not in the same way. I saw another case; the tin lining had been cut but the contents had not been ab- stracted. By Defendant.—This case was opened in the lighter in the presence of the Captain. By Court,.—About the beginning of the discharging of the ship several cases had been taken out. The per- sons present when the first cases were opened were the shipping clerk, VanLeesen, the Captain and Mate, and myself. The second case was opened on board in the presence of Mr. Adrian, Mr. Redlin, the Captain of another vessel in port, and the Captain of the Rifle, about a couple of days after the first case. By the Plaintiff.—What I mean by on board I mean the lighter alongside—they were taken...”
12

“...322 SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. June VQth 1867. CORRESPONDENCE WITH REFERENCE TO ESTABLISHMENT OF RIVER POLICE AT SHANGHAI. Shanghai General Chamber of Commerce. Shanghai, June IDA, 1867. Sir,*-—I beg to hand you herewith printed copy of a letter addressed by the Foreign Firms at this port to the Consular Representatives of Great Britain, France, the United States of America, and Prussia, on the subject of the establishment of a River Police, the original of which has been forwarded to the Consul General for France, and also copies of a memorandum circulated to the residents, and letters to the Agents of the two Mail Steam Ship Companies. I am, Sir, Your most obedient Servant, WALTER PEARSON, Secretary. C. A. Winchester Esq., H. B. M.'s Consul. Shanghai. MEMORANDUM, ( Circulated to Foreign Firms in Shanghai.) From the'views expressed by many of the residents at this port, who are interested in the shipment of all kinds of produce, Silk in particular,—it would appear to be a very general...”
13

“...June 29th 1867. SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. 323 ing with the weight of the hale, as shown on board the steamer, it would he excessively easy to detain the men of the cargo boat where such discrepancy occurred until the matter could be investigated. We are aware, that in the event of 2,000 bales being shipped per mail steamer on the morning of her departure, it would be next to impossible to weigh each bale on its arrival on board, and are of opinion that the necessity for weighing each bale shipped at such time is not so imper- ative as when Silk is shipped one or two days prior to the steamer’s departure, for if the system of Silk plunder is carried on at all in cargo boats, there is no doubt that the chances of plunder are very much greater in the latter case than in the former. Acknowledging the efforts you have already made for the suppression of a system which is so detrimental to the interests of us all, and trusting you will be able to adopt the above suggestion, We are, Sir...”
14

“...324 SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. June 2£th 1867. Buddhism and Confucianism, liad only written documents to guide them. Mr. Muirhead gave us not only the advantage of extensive reading but also of lengthened personal experience. The paper would appear with peculiar appropriateness among the publications of the Asiatic Society ; and although the speaker imagined this might not be altogether en regie, he trusted it would ne- vertheless be done. Many intelligent and advanced thinkers differed from the views expressed ; and differing could not sympathise with them or appreciate the work which had occupied the life time of the gentleman who read the essay. Before it is possible to sym- pathise with that work, men must recognise that Christianity is superior to Buddhism or Confu- cianism, which some thinkers considered as good, and indeed some of the German free-thinkers went so far as to give Buddhism the pre-eminence in all systems of religion. To such men, the labors of Missionaries must...”
15

“...June 2Qth 1867. SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. 325 untoward times set in lias been beard of with more general regret in this Settlement. The North China Daily News states that at a meet- ing of the Shanghai Wharf Company which’was con- vened for the purpose of taking into consideration the means of arranging the affairs, it has been decided to sell the concern by public auction, there being no other mode of meeting a debt of Tls. 22,000 due by the Company to the Commercial Bank. It is said that two of the Che-Hsien’s subordinates have been sent to Soochow in order to undergo an ex- amination upon a charge of accepting certain squeezes from opium shops and gambling Houses in the foreign settlement. This annoyance is of frequent occurrence and it appears so difficult for the native officials to pre- vent those about their offices from lending themselves to such practices, that it may be hoped the matter will be thoroughly sifted. The Fantai, Ting, (formerly Taou- tai at Shanghai) is stated...”
16

“...326 SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR GAZETTE. June 29th 1867. Green Tea :—Purchases of the new Ping Sing Teas have been made at very high rates for shipment to England, per the Agamemnon. We anticipate a consi- derable decline in their value shortly. Shipping :—Several vessels are iin a forward state. The Rate to London is quoted £3 a £3.10/ sterling. Silk.—Business has been restricted to a few houses, and settlements since the departure of the Mail do not exceed 600 bales, on the basis of Tls ?582£ a 585 for Chop No. 3 Tsatlee. The Telegrams about the new European Crop are very conflicting, some stating that it had been much damaged by bad weather, others that it was quite equal to last year ; but the Chinese are trying to propagate the former statement and have, Bince the arrival of the Hdnzing raised their pretension s to Tls. 600 for Chop 3 which Foreigners are not dis- posed to pay. The incessant rains of the past few days create some fears for the second crop. Opium.—Malwa :—Since our last...”
17

“...SUPREME COURT & CONSULAR G AZETTE. load at the Government Steam Cranes in Newcastle, down to 17 2 feet (the Coal being put on board as fast as the ship can take it) and can finish in the Harbour to a draft of 21 feet. Ships can be loaded in Sydney from coasters, with the cost of freight, about 5/. per ton, added. By order, F. W. BIN NEY, Secretary. Sydney, April 20th, 1867, & S. Omeo, Sydney, 17th July, 1866. Gentlemen, It will be pleasing to you to know that the cargo of Coals from the Wallsend Colliery supplied to the S. Oiiuo for her intended vogage to Valparaiso gave great satisfaction, not only to ourselves but also on the West Coast, where we supplied the American steamer Vander- bilt, and the British steamers Tribune, Sutlej (Flagship), and Leander (Commodore’s ship); the Engineers of all these vessels approved highly of them for Steam pur- poses. I am, Gentlemen, Yours faithfully, (signed) HUGH McMECKAN. Melbourne, March 1st, 1867. To the Secretary, Newcastle Wallsend Coal Company...”