Mr. F. aved for the plaintitt and Inv. PI Jones for the di fendants.
Before the evi jury asked for the production of a letter of Sth May referred to in a letter written by Mr. Scott, the Chairman of the Directors on 3rd June to plaintiff.
Counsel agreed that the letter referre.t to was the letter dated the 23rd May and that the date Sth May was a slip on the part of Mr. Scott.
Ernest William Turner, until lately mill manager for 24 sears for the deferdants, said he left their employment on 25th June last. Altogether he hat been seven years in the Oompang's service. He was formerly engineer and engirecr-in-charge. Plaintiff was under witness's orders. It was correct that there were two strikes in the mill during the early part of his employment. Plaintiff had amity for dead vith the latter bout immorality in the mull and
man was sted to look: tfter the hands in the Witness did not consider that the duties in the village of this man wore faith Questions the pos at the mill by Mr George, with fae at present. the actin engineer. a time did the engineer from te uti noon, tolley 1 earlier spell as nig! foreman.
During t he period that night cork as done there wi one foreign night perintendent to take the ph of three Superintendents en duty the day. From February 4 thre was arity of ring bobbins in the mill, and terfered with the output. a Ming-kong had reported that female ands were prevented from coming 1 the anill by loafers, and witness appealed to the Pootung magistrate for assistance. Plaintiff showed witness the letter he received from the directors accusing him of immorality and slackness ut discipline Up to that time witness had heard nothing of this accusation from the Directors. and nothing that he could consider at all Complained of Mr. Chang's methods in} from anyo Witness had been
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.