Complainant summoned defendant for ting him on board the Daniel Webster, pilot-boat, on the 2ist February.
Defendant said he did not assault the complainaut—but he shoved him down because he wanted to take charge of the boat out of (defendant's) hand:
Complainant deposed—The boat was at anchor on the Pootung side. Defendant and I intended going out to sea in her on the 2ist February. "When I went on board, the anchor was got up, and the lowdah took the helm, Defendant jumped up to take the helm from the lowdah. I remonstrated with him, because I was first in tam, The one who is first in turn always takes charge of the boat. Defendant hail had the previous turn, and came next, When I remonstrated with him, he said, "I have put up too long with you, and am going to give it you back." He used bad language to me, and struck me on the breast with his fist. The blow caused me to stagger. He then took me by the coat, and threw me down on the deck. Healso called me a thief, and said I had robbed him of Tls. 1,000 or more. He shouted that out about thirty times. I took the tiller, with the view of steering the Leat so as to wait for a sampan to come alongside to take me off the boat.
shoved me away from the tiller, put his fist near my face, then strike me. He put the helm up, slad the main sheet, and sailed off down the river, so that sampan could not come alongside, carrying me off to nea with him. On the 23rd February, we put into the North Saddles, la gale of wind; and on the 24th he again used bad language towards me. On the 25th hie said he would give me a letter of apology for what he had done, if 1 would not take further notice of agreed to accept the letter of apology.
Defendant got back to Shanghai before I did, and when I arrived I found no letter of apology awaiting me. He had gone down the river again, and had taken another pilot on board the boat against my express wish. He has not since given me a letter of apology. On Saturday last I went to the boat, which had been painted, and found that defendant had painted over the red paint with black. I'spoke to him about it, and he threatened to black mo over as well, at the same time using bad language.
Te transpired that the parties owned the Daniel Webster between them, complainant owning three-fourths and defendant one-fourth of her value, Defendant statel—On the 19th February, complainant insisted, against my will, on coming up the river to Shanghai for coals, although there were six days' coals on hoard. On the 20th, complainant thought he was going to take the Golden State to sea, bat did not do so, It was very aggravating to be obliged to come 75 miles for coals which were not wanted, and. perhaps lose Tis 180. As the complainant insisted on coming to Shanghai, and as he thought he was going to sea in the Golden Stite, {thought 1 was then first in turn, and had charge of the boat, so told the lowdah to "wear" the boat. Complainant would have her "stay," but as this would have lost another half-hour, and I had already been waiting for him two hours, while he went on board two ships, I interfered, and put him down, I told him I was then first in turn, took charge of the boat, and kept charge of ber for six days after. I afterwards put complainant'on board a ship, and also went fon board one myself. We parted shahin, hands. He said he would take no notice of what had passed, and T said it was the best course not to let such a paltry thing go into Court. I did not promise to write him a letter of apology.
Complainant said he considered his tuan to canmand the boat was not over till he got a ship to pilot. was over when he brought her back to Shanghai, whether he got a ship or not. 7
His Worsure said it was ridiculous for meu to quarrel over such a little thing, especially men whose interests were identical, What could it matter who took charge of the boat? It was a very inconvenient way to own property as this boat was owned, but which that state of things existed, they should try and make the best of it and not fall out (as they had done) about a trumpery thing What earthly difference could it make which way the boat was steered at starting?
Complainaut—Ia this ease I did it to avoid an accident, as the boat was going across a steamer's bows.
matter, as there was no accident, and defend-His Wonsime—That did not appear to ant did it his way after all. But Hume is la a weak state of health, and defendant should not have put his band'upon him at all, He admitted he shoved him down, and His Worship would bind him over to keep the peace towards Hume for six months, in his own recognizance of $50. His Worship also advised them to try and go on smoothly together, for all this had arisen out of a little obstinacy. Let him hear again what each said the rule was. Complainant said his turn sted till ho got a ship, while defendant, said complainant Lrougut the boat back to Shanghai without getting a ship it beea (defendant's) turn, Is that 80?
Defendant. said' that was the understood it. But on this occasion, complainant said ho came to Shanghai to get coals, when there were six days' coals on board. His real intention was to try to get a ship at Shanghai to take to sea.
His Worsure—And you would not the chance—you took him off to sea, jefendant—He went on board two ships at Shanghai, bat did not get either.
His Woxsure—So long as you, ha arrangement, it does not matter what it but I'think complainant's is the more sensible one to make, otherwise the mau who Lappe to be out with the boat might be induced to rewarn out waiting for a while the interest of the boat required that she should Urowzht nek to Shanghai to get stores or refit. 's "turn" ought not to depend ty for getting stores, but on whether be has had a ship or not. But let ce any arrangement they choess "uy do mako one and after it is made keep to it.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.