Chang yo Sing v. J. T. Crotty.
Plaintiff, a tailor, sought to recover $94.25, alleged balance of account for work done.
Defendant disputed the debt, and stated the plaintiff came to him about, six or wen weeks ago, and asked for work. engaged him, and showed him the list of pric paid," A fortnight ago, circumstances arose which made him suspicious of plainti intentions, and he told him to prepare to settle up and leave his employ, also to buy back the check tid for every garment had received mat for. " He (det dant) had broken 4 consequently hind not given the tickets for all the material, but the de could be shown from the books. ments on account ma: settling, as being due to hi in reply to his Honor, said he had defendant a fortid that, was the case, and he amount was about $300, and
amount tot Ho had not got $50, a9 in excess of the Was now sworn, and examined through Heding, the Court interpreter, He id the defendant, who is in the employ of ers, Long, Crawford & Ca., engaged jerk on behalf of that firm, and ho worked for them one month and six days.
ft on the 6th of the present month, ing been dismissed from his employ then due to him, He presen 1g in the total to $316.25. Plaintiff all, then another 100, and $2.9. The bill was me ale cut in Chin fendant P's engagement was to mako up " number of garments at certain price. He accepted the price list which was shown him. It was in Chinese He found the plaintiff had Defendant denied this, and ssid he could produce the book to prove that the prices charged were much higher.
His Honour said the parties wore now in direct conflict; plaintiff must produce a copy of his bill, and the defendant must produce his book. "The case must be adjourned.
August 18th.
At this, the adjourned hearing, His Hoxovr asked for the production of the account showing the rate of payment given by the defendant, and on alist. being handed in, he also asked if the plaintiff had seen it?
Plaintif' said he had the scale of ment, and, in accordance with it, he made His Howoun (to defendant)—Do you dis. perca as to the number of articles charged jor?
Defendant—Plaintiff has charged twice over, both for garments made and for alterations, and he has also chaiged- higher prices than were agreed upon.
Plaintiff produced his account written in Chinese, from which, by direction of his Honour, Heding, the Court interpreter, trans-checked his Honour from the list in Engli by the defendant.
This process occupied a considerable time, and it was found that the two accounts differed. in several particulars, the plaintiff including a greater number of garments than were admitted by the defendant.
The defendant was then sworn, and stated he had his own book by which to check the plaintiffs work. On the 6th in plaintiff came to him, and said his accowi amounted to $315. in consequence of ti compradore having informed him that the plaintiff was under the surveillance of the was desirous of settling his account ging him. It was customary to settle on the Ist of each month, but as plaintif' had unfinished work in haud, it was thought better that he should complete it, and then to settle all together. Plaintiff brought his account in Chinese, and as be read off the various items, be (defendant) entered them on the ist handed to the Court, and also checked them in a book kept for that purpose in some instances, he found the plaintiff charged for more garments than wei given him to make. He pointed this out to plaintiff, who admitted that it was so, the account was brought down to the number written on the list, which included all that he had given to the plaintiff. He claimed $70 or $80 for alterations, which he (defendant) refused to pay, offering him $30, which was their worth. Plaintiff accepted that sum and it was paid by the compradore. was then discharged, but in two or three days afterwards he came and asked to be taken again.
On that occasion he was paid the to him, $104.85, having been id $20 and $100. Next day be more, then offered to take $40, ing refused, issued the summons for $04.25.
Plaintiff, in the course of a long examination, admitted that he checked the different items with the defendant, and said it took them all day to do it. They agreed as to tome ofthe items, but notasto others. "They came to no arrangement about wanted $65 for alterations, and defendant offered him $14.
Defendant—That is not true, I offered him $30, which he accepted.
His Hoxoon anid it true that the defendant had checked the plaintiff's claim on the list produced, but it seemed the plaintiff did not agree to the reductions, Defendant—But he took the mone His Hoxoun—Yes, he might done that, but be came again and claimed more money.
Defendant—He came to ask me to take him back, and said he did not want any money at rent times paid him $20, then $100, His Hosour—It is very likely if you had tak for me the claim very different him back, he would he now makes. That thing.
In reply to the Court, plaintiff said he was not satisfied with the amount of money he bad received, but took it because his workmen had to be paid out of it. It was the following morning that he went to defendant and asked him for the remaining $65.
His Hoxour—That shows the plaintiff was ad received. finished after the defendant had paid him $102—not $104, as he had stated. Defendant told him to wait until the accounts had been gone through by a third person. He waited some days, and no one having gone over the accounts, he brought the action.
it of his Honour, the order book con! entries of the work hi done, were handed to him; ani these the defendant said would show all the work issued to the plaintiff.
His Hovour again adjourned the case, saying he would retain the books and go through them, in order to satisfy himself how far they corresponded with the plaintiff's statement of account.
Breach of Contract.—Chit ah Sing v. T. R. Shave.
The plaintiff claimed $36, as damages for breach of contract, and the return of deposit mone} fendant is Captain of the Laughing Wave, and said his ship came alongside the wharf on Wednesday evening last to discharge a cargo of sandalwood. The ship had some scrap iron on board by way of ballast. He had no personal knowledge as to the weight, but the manifest said five tons or under. The ship was afterwards hauled off into the stream, and on Friday he sold the iron to the plaintiff at $2.10 per picul. Plaintiff paid $5 as deposit money, and on Saturday morning he came for the iron, and seemed to think he was hardly dealt with because he (defendant) could not rmit him urehase away then.
hatches were all closed, and it would have been very inconvenient to open them. Plaintiff then went away, and he heard no more of him until he received the summons, claiming $36 as damages.
Plaintiff, sworn, said he bought the iron of the Captain on Friday at 12 o'clock, at $2.10 per picul. The Captain told him to come next jay and fetch it away. He wont on, the fol-owing day, and the Captain said the iron was worth more money, and that he had Leen offered $2.50 per pial for it by. another man, and, that as defendant had paid $5 deposit, he had better take a portion of the iron at the price agreed to, to the value of the $5.
Defendant denied this version of the affair altogether. No such thing had occurred. Plaintiff was quite at liberty to take away all the iron at $2.10 per picul.
Plaintiff said he did not go again for the iron, because he was told it had been sold to another man.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.