As to the damages: it is urged that' the defendants have treated the plaintiff well and-even after the events of August 20, offered to take him back into their employ on his old terms. I agree that the defendants have not been ungenerous towards the plaintiff, but 1 apnot see that an offer to reinstate the plaintiff in his old position can mitigate the damages. The man was openly dismissed before customers and other employees and his duty is to minimize the loss py trying to obtain employment elsewhere. I cannot find authority for the proposition that it was his duty to accept the offer to reinstate him on his old terms. In the case of Brace 7. Calder to which I have been referred the plaintiff was offered work by a new firm, ~consisting of two of the old partners who were held to have wrongfully dismissed him; and that distinguishes it from this case.
I therefore give judgement for the plaintiff for what is claimed on the first: head—83,714 is the amount which has been agreed upon—and as the circumstances surrounding the assault were rather ignominious for the plaintiff, for a further $100 in respect of it, with the costs of the action.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.