CHINESE WIDOW.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 238, 9 October 1933, Page 8

CHINESE WIDOW.

APPEAL COURT CASE

EVIDENCE ON COMMISSION. AUCKLAND APPLICATION. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. Argument is being heard before the Court of Appeal to-day on the appeal of Thomas Wong Doo, of Auckland, merchant, from the decision of Mr. Justice Herdman dismissing his application for leave to take evidence of witnesses living in China. Appellant is the sole executor of the. will of Wong Qnoi, late of Auckland, market gardener, deceased, who was knocked down and run over by a van owned by the present respondent, Kana Bhana, in Auckland, on December 10, 19.31.

Appellant issued proceedings claiming £120 general and £200 special damages on behalf of An Kuo Chi, widow of deceased, and Ah Nu (otherwise Wong Mow> and Clio Har, children of deceased. Appellant then applied to the Court for a commission to take the evidence of the widow, An Kuo Chi, and of dependents at Fook Tin Lee Sha Dee Kong Moon, near Hongkong, as well as the evidence of persons able to prove the records, and of an expert in Chinese law as to the validity of a ceremony of marriage. The right of the widow and children to claim was queried by respondent. Mr. Justice Henlman. in refusing to grant a commission, stated: "It is said that polygamy is permissible in China, so Quoi may have had more than one wife and more than one family. It follows, therefore, that there may be other claimants for compensation." As the trial was before a jury, his Honor held that, all evidence as to marriage and paternity of children should be "heard before a jury and that witness should be brought to New Zealand. The- appeal is brought from this decision. Mr. Lcary, in opening the case for appellant, stated that the evidence, both of the records and witnesses in China, was required to substantiate the claim of appellant. The records would not be allowed to be removed from China, and the only way that evidence of them would be used would be by commission. The cost of bringing a number of witnesses from China to New Zealand would be very considerable, and even when witnesses did arrive here, there would be certain formalities which might prevent their evidence being given. Appellant stated in evidence that if Chinese had enough money they had more wives than one. Counsel submitted, however, that evid/nce showed al*o that the widow of deceased was his only wife, and that she was entitled to claim compensation.

Mr. Justice MacGregor: But if polygamy is permitted in China would not the marriage be invalid in Fnglish law?

Counsel contended that if the marriage was valid by Chinese law it could not be attacked in New Zealand.

Mr. Justice Ostler: Then if a man had 20 wives in China they would nil be validly married and all be entitled to claim compensation on the death of their husband.

Mr. Eeary submitted that whether the marriage was legitimate or not could not afTect the question us to whether evidence should lie taken, as the rights of children were affected and the claims were not limited to the legitimate issue. (Proceeding , .)