When the plaintiff complained about the scaffolding, the defend-anti went and saw the plaintiff and asked for a month in which to complete his wall and remove his scaffolding, which was granted by the plaintiff without a word about encroachment.
I consider that I am justified in coming to the conclusion that the defendant had no knowledge whatever that in erecting his building he was doing the plaintiff an injury. He had measured out his land by his Chinese plan and in accordance with the boundary stones. If the Chinese plan was incorrect, and also the boundary stones, there is nothing to. show that the defendant had any knowledge of it. He appears to have acted quite innocently throughout. There is no doubt but the defendant has incurred considerable expenditure, while at present the plaintiff's land is a parcel of waste ground. But the plaintiff says he intended' to build Chinese houses on his strip of land and that the loss of the 10 inches makes a difference of 25 per cent. per annum in the rent of the houses he can now build compared to what he could have built without the loss of the 10 inches. A plan of the proposed buildings is put in which shows 27 houses to be built on the site.
I cannot avoid thinking that the idea of building these houses is to some extent an afterthought] and not unconnected with a desire to impress the Court with the damage done to the property. The scheme did not originate till Jong after the knowledges of the encroachment. came to the knowledge of plaintiff.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.