Anderson v Bank of British Columbia

THIS was an appeal by the Bank of British Columbia and H. E. Ransom, their manager, from an order of the Master of the Rolls directing production of a letter dated the 16th of November, 1874.

The general nature of the case made by the bill filed on the 7th of October, 1875, was as follows:— That the Plaintiffs, Anderson & Co., of London, and William Guild & Co., of London, and the Defendants, Laidlaw & Gate, of Portland in Oregon, were jointly interested in an adventure for bringing wheat from America to Europe; that the British Bank of Columbia was an English bank, having a branch at Portland, in Columbia, and acted as the banker of Laidlaw & Gate; that moneys belonging to the adventure were placed to a separate account, “Laidlaw & Gate, London account,” with the Portland branch, and that the bank knew the nature of the title to these moneys; that Laidlaw & Gate, being indebted to the bank, transferred in December, 1873, the balance to their own private account, in part satisfaction of the debt, and also about the same time gave the bank a security on a cargo of wheat belonging and known by the bank to belong to the adventure, which cargo was shipped on board the Melancthon, and afterwards sold by the bank; that the adventure resulted in a loss, and that the Plaintiffs, as between themselves and Laidlaw & Gate, were entitled to the moneys thus received By the bank, amounting to £4328. The bill prayed that the transfer to the private account of Laidlaw & Gate, and the mortgage of the wheat, might be declared fraudulent and void as against the Plaintiffs, and for repayment by the bank.

On the 11th of November, 1874, Mr. Ransom, as manager of the bank, had received from the Plaintiffs' solicitors a letter demanding repayment of the above sum, which letter concluded as follows:— “We understand that this matter has already been the subject of discussion at your board, and we shall be obliged by your informing us whether it is the intention of the bank to repay the moneys to our clients, or whether they are to be driven to litigation to obtain them; and, in the latter case, we must ask you to refer us to your solicitors, to whom we may send process in the suit which we are instructed to commence.” About the same time the Plaintiff Anderson had an interview with Ransom on the subject. Ransom deposed as follows:— “On perusing the above letter, and considering what had passed at the interview with the Plaintiff A. G. Anderson, I observed that litigation was imminent, and I felt that it was essential that the bank should have the benefit of legal advice, and that for that purpose there should be obtained from the other side the full particulars of all the facts and circumstances of the case likely to be required by the solicitor of the bank. I determined, therefore, at once to telegraph to Mr. Russell instructions for full particulars, and at the same time to request the attendance of the solicitor of the bank at the next meeting of the court of directors.”

Mr. Ransom, accordingly, on the 14th of November, 1874, telegraphed to Mr. Russell, the branch manager at Portland, as follows:—

“Claims referred to letter 18 Sept. made for 25,000 dollars. Send by letter fullest particulars whole transactions, especially cargo Melancthon and copy of account.”

The letter of the 16th of November, 1874, to which the present question related, was the letter written by Mr. Russell, in pursuance of the above telegram, to Mr. Ransom, as general manager of the bank.

The usual order having been made for an affidavit of documents, Ransom and another officer of the bank made an affidavit, the second part of the schedule to which contained an entry of this letter and a number of other letters and documents. The deponents objected to produce the documents in the second part of the schedule, “on the ground that they are correspondence between the Defendants, the Bank of British Columbia, and their solicitors or agents, in reference to the subject of this suit, and documents prepared by their solicitors exclusively for the purposes of this suit, or with reference thereto, and are privileged.”

A summons for production of this letter was adjourned into Court. The evidence of Ransom was given, to the effect stated above, as to the communications with him and his sending the telegram. The summons came on to be heard before the Master of the Rolls on the 11th of March, 1876.