Post by nzbc on Jun 5, 2016 19:56:52 GMT 12
CIVIL CASE
His Honor Mr Justice Denniston sat at the Supreme Court, to-day, to hear the claim of Ah Long and others, representing the Chinese Society called the Chang Ching Tong Society," against Ah Chong, for the sum of £549. The Society was organised to raiae funds, and collect and export the bodies of deceased Chinamen, and it was alleged that the defendant had wrongfully paid over money raised by the West Coast Society to a similar Society in Dunedin. Mr A. R. Guinness/of Greymouth, with him Mr Stringer, appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr J. M'Gregor, of Dunedin, with him Mr M. Barman, of Greymouth, appeared for the defendant. Mr Guinness, in his opening^jiddress, said that in 1878 a Society had been formed in Dunedin, called the Chang Ching Tong Society, whose object was to raise subscriptions from New Zealand Chinese, for the purpose of disinterring deceased Chinamen', and sending their bodies to China. The Society's headquarters were in Dunedin, and two collectors were appointed to raise subscriptions on the West Coast. After carrying out its objects, in 1882, the Society bad a balance of over £3000 in hand, and that was sent by the managers of the Dunedin Society to China.' The West Coast subscribers were dissatisfied, and in 1888 or 1889 they held a large meeting in Greymouth., and resolved to form a West Coast Society. ,The Society was formed, and the trustees began to oollect. subscriptions. A similar Society was smarted in Dunedin about two years later,' and die-legates from the West CoMt Society attended a meeting at Dun- j edin. There it was agreed! that a joint contract would be made for the disintermenfc of bodies throughout the colony. After the contract had been paid for a balance of £349 remained from the amount paid by the West Coast Society, and the defendant, who was one of the delegates,' paid ,the balance to the Dun- j eddn Society. I Mr M'Gregor said that the defence was that the West Coast ajid Dunedin Societies w«re one organisation,, the head office being in Dunedin. Mr Guinness claimed that the Societies were entirely separate, and. the Dunedin people had no right to tbe fundte of the Greymoufch Society. .The delegates who went from Gneymoufch to Dunedin were not authorised to enter into a contract as a part of the Dunedin Society^ but were to maintain a separate constitution. j Ohow Fong said that he remembered) a Society being formed in Dunedin about twenty-three or twenty-four years ago. It was the Ohong Ching Tong Society, and two TOpresentatives from it were sent to Gireymouth to collect subscriptions. The bodies were raised and sent home, and a balance of £3000 was sent to China. Mr M'Gregor stated that the money was sent to the headquarters of the Society in China. M The witness continued his e™ence, stating that about 1888 or 1889 he and Ah Ghong a project .for formmg a So3r for WesttaJ, Nelson aad Mj£ borough. It was farmed, and ruks w&re of the rules put in Joe Waw gave evidence that Be had been a trusted of tbe£WJ»J* ifS China Tong, and understood that it was ■sirs EtsJS* 33* separate one.CIVIL CASE
Star , Issue 8187, 9 December 1904, Page 4 paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=TS19041209.2.55.1&srpos=6&e=-------100--1----0joe+tong+dunedin--
His Honor Mr Justice Denniston sat at the Supreme Court, to-day, to hear the claim of Ah Long and others, representing the Chinese Society called the Chang Ching Tong Society," against Ah Chong, for the sum of £549. The Society was organised to raiae funds, and collect and export the bodies of deceased Chinamen, and it was alleged that the defendant had wrongfully paid over money raised by the West Coast Society to a similar Society in Dunedin. Mr A. R. Guinness/of Greymouth, with him Mr Stringer, appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr J. M'Gregor, of Dunedin, with him Mr M. Barman, of Greymouth, appeared for the defendant. Mr Guinness, in his opening^jiddress, said that in 1878 a Society had been formed in Dunedin, called the Chang Ching Tong Society, whose object was to raise subscriptions from New Zealand Chinese, for the purpose of disinterring deceased Chinamen', and sending their bodies to China. The Society's headquarters were in Dunedin, and two collectors were appointed to raise subscriptions on the West Coast. After carrying out its objects, in 1882, the Society bad a balance of over £3000 in hand, and that was sent by the managers of the Dunedin Society to China.' The West Coast subscribers were dissatisfied, and in 1888 or 1889 they held a large meeting in Greymouth., and resolved to form a West Coast Society. ,The Society was formed, and the trustees began to oollect. subscriptions. A similar Society was smarted in Dunedin about two years later,' and die-legates from the West CoMt Society attended a meeting at Dun- j edin. There it was agreed! that a joint contract would be made for the disintermenfc of bodies throughout the colony. After the contract had been paid for a balance of £349 remained from the amount paid by the West Coast Society, and the defendant, who was one of the delegates,' paid ,the balance to the Dun- j eddn Society. I Mr M'Gregor said that the defence was that the West Coast ajid Dunedin Societies w«re one organisation,, the head office being in Dunedin. Mr Guinness claimed that the Societies were entirely separate, and. the Dunedin people had no right to tbe fundte of the Greymoufch Society. .The delegates who went from Gneymoufch to Dunedin were not authorised to enter into a contract as a part of the Dunedin Society^ but were to maintain a separate constitution. j Ohow Fong said that he remembered) a Society being formed in Dunedin about twenty-three or twenty-four years ago. It was the Ohong Ching Tong Society, and two TOpresentatives from it were sent to Gireymouth to collect subscriptions. The bodies were raised and sent home, and a balance of £3000 was sent to China. Mr M'Gregor stated that the money was sent to the headquarters of the Society in China. M The witness continued his e™ence, stating that about 1888 or 1889 he and Ah Ghong a project .for formmg a So3r for WesttaJ, Nelson aad Mj£ borough. It was farmed, and ruks w&re of the rules put in Joe Waw gave evidence that Be had been a trusted of tbe£WJ»J* ifS China Tong, and understood that it was ■sirs EtsJS* 33* separate one.CIVIL CASE
Star , Issue 8187, 9 December 1904, Page 4 paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&cl=search&d=TS19041209.2.55.1&srpos=6&e=-------100--1----0joe+tong+dunedin--