This was a claim for Tls. 146, being money advanced to defendant by plaintiff as compradore daring August 1910.
Both parties appeared in In ay i to. his Lordship, defendant person.
said be disputed the claim, as the defendant had broken his agreement as Wy compradore, His Lordebip asked for the agreement, and defendant ssid it was in the Mixed Court Plaintiff stopped work sbout August 8, and witness wrote to hi two occasions to try and get hi continue as compradore or to give him an scoount of what he bad advanced.
His Lordship said he would like to know exactly what happened in the Mixed Court.
Defendant said be applied for " sam-mons io the Mixed Court to force the The plaintiff, however, absconded and Iaintiff to comply with his agreement.
'a warrant was issued for his arrest, but it was October before be was found. At the Mixed Court the ent: terminated and instead of plaintiff being punished, s witness waared, or forced to agree with hie agreement, it was decided that witness was to pay back Tie, 146, His Lordship said that as the agronment was not in Coart, he could not hear the case then, He would have to apply to the Mixed Coart for the agroemeat and as to what was determined by them, and on that he would be able to consider the matter ment of plaintiff's accounts. This he Defendant said be also wanted
been unable 20 far to get.
His Lordship explained to the plaintiff the course be proposed to take, and "cal scoounts to show that the money be vas claiming was really dae.
tiff said the agreement was cancelled by the Mixed Coart, and the Mixed Coart alo ssid that deleadant based, because Mixed Court has n0 authority to order Mr. Pierce to pay any money.
The case was theo adjourned, the parties to be notified of the date of trial.
Shanghai, December 12, APPRAL, Before the Full Court, Before Sir Havizuasp de Savewanez, Judge, and F.8, A, Bourne, Esq., cua. Assistant Judge.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.