Tuck Chang & Co. - Shanghai

[dognose]

TUCK CHANG & Co. - 德祥

A topic for recording information regarding the important firm of Tuck Chang & Co. of Shanghai, who were in business from 1901 to c.1935.




See: https://www.925-1000.com/ch_TuckChang.html

and: https://www.925-1000.com/chinex_03.html#M



Trev.

[dognose]

An image of the premises of Tuck Chang and Co. Ltd., located at 67 Broadway, on the corner of Minghong Road, Shanghai:



This image was published in 1930.

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. - Shanghai - 1934

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. Ltd. - Shanghai - 1933

Established in 1901.

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co., Ltd. - Shanghai - 1930

Tang Choon-hing - Manager
Johnson, T. - Sales Manager
Leang, W.P. - Assistant

Source: The Shanghai Directory - 1930

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. Ltd. - Shanghai - 1927

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. - Shanghai - 1933

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. - Shanghai - 1909

1285-86, Broadway, Hongkew

Tang Chi Jong - Manager
Liang Wai Poo
Chang Ging San
Tang Choon Heng

Source: Rosenstock's Directory of China and Manila - 1909

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. - Shanghai - 1927

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co., Ltd. - Shanghai - 1933

Tang Choon Hing - Manager

Source: Rosenstock's Business Directory of China - 1933

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. - Shanghai - 1928

Trev.

[dognose]

THE MIXED COURT

Shanghai, 30th January. Before Mr. Hana Hsuen (Magistrate) and Mr. B. Twyman (British Assessor)

Sundry Cases

A coolie lately employed by Messrs. Tuck Chang and Co., jewellers, was charged with stealing a number of silver cigarette cases, etc., from his employers’ shop, 1286, Broadway, between the 1st and 24th instant. The stolen property was valued at $260 and had all been recovered from a native pawn-shop. The thief was sentenced to 100 blows and three months’ imprisonment.

Source: North-China Herald and Supreme Court and Consular Gazette - 2nd February 1905

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. Ltd. - Shanghai - 1921

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co. - Shanghai - 1932

Trev.

[dognose]

H. M. POLICE COURT

Shanghai, 10th November, Before J. C. E. Douglas, Esq., Police Magistrate.

R. (WHING FAT AND OTHERS). v. PATRICK DUFFIN

Patrick Duffin was charged with having on the 9th instant, at No.27, Nanking Road, obtained by false pretences from one Whing Fat, jewellery to the value of $712, with intent to defraud.

Detective-sergeant Kingston, sworn, said — Last night I received a warrant from your Worship for the arrest of one Patrick Duffin. At 9.16 a.m. today accompanied by Detective Young, I went down to Woosung on the French mail tender and we arrested the accused on board the French mail steamer. I read the warrant over to him and gave him the usual caution. He stated that he know anything at all about the matter, that he had been drinking since Sunday, and that he did not remember anything at all. On searching his effects I found a gold chain, a diamond pin, and a pearl pin, which the complainant, Whing Fat, who accompanied us to Woosung, identified as his property. Whing Fat also identified the accused as the man who obtained the property from him yesterday under the name of Biron. We brought the accused back to Shanghai by the tender and at the control police station I again charged him with the offence and gave him the usual caution. He stated there also that he remembered nothing at all about the matter. His property consists of three handbags, one tin trunk, and two parcels of clothing and bedding. In reply to his Worship, Detective-sergeant Kingston said he would like a remand, as there were several other complaints about accused, and there had not yet been time to investigate them.

His Worship said the accused would have to be remanded in custody unless application was made for bail.

The accused applied for bail.

His Worship said the bail required would be accused's own recognisances for $1,000 and two sureties for $2,000 each. The necessary bail not being forth-coming, the accused was remanded in custody until Wednesday next.

Source: North-China Herald and Supreme Court and Consular Gazette - 17th November 1905

To be continued.

Trev.

[dognose]

H. M. POLICE COURT (continued)

Shanghai, 15th November.

Patrick Duffin was brought up on remand, charged with having on the 5th instant, at No. 27,Nanking Road, obtained by false pretences from one Whing Fat jewellery to the value of $712, with intent to defraud.

William Roland Lemarchand, sworn, said — I am an assistant in the employ of the P. and O. S. N. Company. I identify the accused as one Patrick Duffin, who was in the employ of the Company. He entered the service of the Company as a temporary writer on the 28th of August last. His salary, was, I think, $150 per month, but I am not absolutely certain. On the 7th of November the office received a letter from him. (The letter was produced and was to the effect that the accused wished to resign on the grounds of illness and asked for a free passage to Colombo.) A reply was sent from the office the same day. (Letter in reply put in, to the effect that accused had better report himself to Dr. Macleod for examination, and regretting inability to grant accused a free passage by the Company's steamers.) Accused did not come to the office next day and has not been since. We heard no more from Mr. Duffin after that. I did not see him again until to-day. We got a compradore order from the Messageries Maritimes, signed by accused, for his passage from Shanghai to Singapore. We did not pay. In the employ of our Company is C. Biron. He is now in England on leave. He went home about the 28th of June last. I do not know that accused had any money left in the bands of the compradore, I will ascertain and let you know the amount.

Detective Young, sworn, said — About 2 p.m, on the 9th instant I received a telephone message asking me to come to 27, Nanking Road, the house of Whing Fat. I immediately proceeded there and made investigations and in consequence of what I was told I made enquiries. I came to you for a warrant that same evening. The following day I arrested the accused on the French mail steamer. I found in the accused’s possession certain articles of jewellery.

The witness produced a gold chain, a diamond pin, and a pearl pin, which he said he found in the accused's possession in a leather bag, and in cases bearing the name of Whing Fat. Also some gold and pearl neck-tie clasps, a heart-shaped locket of gold set with a ruby, a flat gold pencil-case, a pair of silver glove-stretchers and a silver button-hook, which he said he had ascertained were obtained from Tuck Chang; and two gold lockets, a pencil set with rubies, which he had ascertained had been obtained from Cheong Shing. He also found in accused's possession a leather bag and a dressing gown, which Mr. T. W. Wilson said had been obtained by accused from him. Mr. Wilson also claimed that accused had obtained from him an otter fur vest, which witness believed accused still had on.

Source: North-China Herald and Supreme Court and Consular Gazette - 17th November 1905

To be continued.

Trev.

[dognose]

H. M. POLICE COURT (continued)

Shanghai, 15th November.

Kum Hung-tsau, cautioned, said — I am an employee of Whing Fat, which is the name of a jeweller's shop at 27, Nanking Road. The accused first came into the shop a little after 10 a.m. on the 9th of November and asked to see some gold chains. One was sold to him for $98. That (produced) is the one — it bears the name of the shop. He then bought a pearl breast pin (produced and identified). I asked his name and where he worked. He replied that he was working for the P. & O. Company. He referred to the hong list and pointed out his name as Biron. He then bought another diamond breast pin (produced and identified). There was no bargain about the price of the goods. He asked to sign a compradore order, and I asked him if I could go to his compradore to get the money and he said I could and that it was all right. I sent a man to get the money from accused and he came back and said there was no such man at the P. & O. office. I then personally made enquiries at the P. & O. office and was told there was no such man in that office, and that Biron had returned home. I went back and told my master, who said the matter must be reported to the Police. I tried to find the accused at several hotels, and the matter was eventually reported to the Police, who sent men to the store. Next day I went down to Woosung with two policemen. The two policemen went on board first and when they saw the gold chain they called me on board. I saw the accused and saw that he was the man who had bought the jewellery from me. I could not get a single cash from the compradore for these things.

By Detective-sergeant Kingston — In the shop, after purchasing the goods, the accused signed and gave me that compradore order (produced). He signed it in my presence.

His Worship gave the accused the usual statutory caution and asked him if he had anything to say in reply to the charge.

The accused said he had nothing to say, but would like to be dealt with summarily.

His Worship said he could not, under the circumstances, deal with the case summarily, but would ask accused if he would rather be tried by a Judge and jury, or by the Judge sitting alone.

The accused replied that he would prefer to be tried by the Judge sitting alone.

His Worship said he was obliged to make a further charge against the accused, that he did on the 7th of November unlawfully incur a certain debt and liability to one Tuck Chang, for the sum of $83, and did obtain credit for that amount under false pretences, contrary to Statue 32 and 33. Vict., cap. 62, sect. 13.

Source: North-China Herald and Supreme Court and Consular Gazette - 17th November 1905

To be continued.

Trev.

[dognose]

H. M. POLICE COURT (continued)

Shanghai, 15th November.

Tung Chun-ching, cautioned, said he was an employee of Tuck Chang and Co., who carried on the business of at 1286, Broadway. About 3 p.m. on the 7th of November the accused came into the shop and asked if they had any silver hand-mirrors. He was shown one and told that the price was $25, He said it was too dear and asked if they had any glove-stretchers. He was shown one pair at $7.50 and said he would take same. He then bought a button-hook, and afterwards asked to see some gold lockets. Some lockets were shown to him and he took one which was set with a ruby, the price of which was $25. He then bought a gold pencil case at $32 and also some neck-tie clasps at $12. The articles produced were those that he purchased. He then told witness to go to the P. and O. office for the money. Next day witness went there for the money, but was told by the compradore that the man was not there. As the accused was not to be found there, the matter was allowed to stand over for further enquiries. Accused gave witness to understand that if he called at the P. and O. office be would get the bill paid. He signed the two compradore orders produced—one for $69 and the other for $14. The compradore declined to pay the orders. Witness was sure that the accused was the man who came into the shop.

His Worship gave accused the usual statutory caution, and accused said he had nothing to say.

There was a third charge of having on the 9th of November unlawfully incurred a certain debt and liability to one Cheong Shing of the sum of $177 and obtained credit for this amount under false pretence.

Lai Siau-lan, cautioned, said he was an employee of Cheong Shing, jeweller, of 21, Nanking Road. About 10.30 a.m. on the 9th of November the accused came into the store and asked to be shown some gold rings. He selected a gold ring and put it on his finger. He afterwards bought three gold lockets, two gold safety pins, and a pencil set with stones, (Identified the articles mentioned.) Accused then asked for a piece of paper on which to sign his name. Witness asked where he worked and he replied at the P. and O. Company, and told witness to get the money for the jewellery at the P. and O. office next day. That same day witness went to the P. and O. office to make enquiries and was told by the clerks there that there was such a man, but he had been sick during the last few days and was then on leave. Witness afterwards heard that the accused was about to go away by steamer, and also heard later that he had been arrested. Witness then reported the matter to the Police and gave them a list of the articles which the accused had obtained from him. The I. O. U. produced was the one which accused signed in witness's presence.

Accused was cautioned in the usual manner and had nothing to say. The hearing of a further similar charge of obtaining credit by false pretences from one T. W. Wilson was adjourned until Friday morning next.

Source: North-China Herald and Supreme Court and Consular Gazette - 17th November 1905

(As a side-note, Patrick Duffin was found guilty of the charges against him and on the 6th December 1905 was sentenced to three months imprisonment with hard labour. His time spent on remand did not count as part of the sentence.)

Trev.

[dognose]

A line from a report of a Shanghai H.M. Court case that was held in 1937 referring to events of around 1935 that gives the likely reason to the closure of Tuck Chang & Co. Ltd.:

Later, a ring was ordered from the Jewellery firm of Tuck Chang; some delay was experienced in getting the ring, owing to the suicide of the proprietor of the shop in the meanwhile, but they eventually secured it, the total cost of the ring being between $200 and $300.

Source: Shanghai Law Reports - H.M. Court - Nadia Vassielevsky v. Abraham Sansom - The North China Herald - 17th March 1937

Trev.

[dognose]

Tuck Chang & Co., Ltd. - Shanghai - 1924

Trev.