Shanghai, 13th August. Before R. W. Maxsetexp, Esq., Assistant Fudge.
Don Amt v, Keeutyo.
This was a claim for $19.43 for wages duo from the 27th of April to-the Ist of June.
Plaintiff said he was engaged by the defendant as cook. He left the Istter's service on the Ist of June, after dinner, as he was sick. On the 23rd of May' he Lecame ill and gave notice to Mrs. Keeling that he would have to put a substitute in his place, but she would not allow him to dose and he then gave notice of his intention to leave. After dinner on the Ist of June he told Mrs. Keeling he was going and she told-him to come on the 10th for his wages. His pay was $14 4 month. Questioned by Mr. Keeling plaintiff denied that defendant told him on the 1st of June that if he left before the 2nd he (Mr. Keeling) would not pay him wages. Plaintiff told Mis. Keeling when he was engaged that if he were paid $16 a month he would provide a second cook, otherwise she would have to pay. It was customary in hotels and boarding houses for the employer to pay the second cook.
Mr. Keeling, sworn. said that the evidence given by the plaintiff was false. e558 engaged the man himself. The real reason for the plaintit's leaving was that ov the 30th of May he broke "lemon syucezer witness spoke to him about it and told him he must buy a new one. Next morning he informed witness that he was going away, and was told that if he went he would not
and left. On the 10th of June he came be paid awingle cash but he said "*maskec," back for his wages, which witness refused pay. Witness never at any time em-Played second cook.
is Honour adjourned the case until 10 o'clock the next morning, in order that Mrs. Keeling's evidence might. be taken.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.