Theodore Melbart said that at the time of the formation of defendant company he was manager of the '"Creameries." The "Creameries" joined defendant company at the end of May, 1921, for delivery of the former's property to defendants. The "Creameries'' did not cease to exist, still retaining its immovable property. The two concerns were separate, although the actual property or goods, he repeated, had been handed over. Witness still remained in the employment of the '"Creameries." While in Vladivostok, he learnt about the military boots, manufactured in America. There were about 50,000 of them. After the "Creameries" got them, they were kept in defendants' godown. Ten thousand were sold to Dr. Shendrikoff. A quantity—remained in the hands of the "Creameries,"" but most of the boots were shipped from Vladivostok to Harbin. Dn Shendrikoff had paid for his boots.
In reply to a question by his Lordship, witness said the cost of the boots was G. $5 per pair.
Mr. Wing reminded his Lordship that according to what had been stated earlier in the proceedings, the boots came from the United States, and no payment at all was made for them. Counsel believed that "was the position. 3 His Lordship (to witness)—Did you see the bill?—I saw it. It was for 50,000 and was written in gold dollars.
Continuing his evidence, witness said that at the end of 1992, statements of account. were made out as between defendants and the "Creameries." and he detailed subsequent political happenings.
His Lordship—We seem to be travelling a long way considering the various forms of government that existed in Vladivostok.
Defendant company (Mr. Me resumed) owed—the $950,000.
Master, in his opening statement for. the defence, said Tat the boots certainly were bought by Shendvikoff. but the position the defence took up was that those boots were never really Dr. Shendrikoff's private property. They were in his possession as the representative of a Cossack bank. Plaintiff was nothing more or less than one of Shendrikoff's nominees, who were simply based by Dr. Shenkrikoff as a cloak to conceal his own dealings. as, far as he could, from the authorities, because he was a very well-known man. He was actually arrested. He was liable to arrest at any time and the whole idea was to avoid. arrest and requisition of the goods, "I do not.know who ought to sue," Mr. Master continued. "He may be the present representative of the Cossack troop, but at any) rate, he is not Ibragimoff."
Assuming the boots were de: posited with defendants "y anybody, then those boots had been taken. out of defendants' control, without their knowledge and consent. by superior authorities—the Government authorities of Vladivostok. Since then defendants had rever had the goods in their hands. Defendants had never been either in a position to deliver the goods or to hand over proceeds of sale. All the defence, therefore, had to show. was that they took reasonably good care of the boots. If they were taken out of their possession by robbers or superior authority, the onus was cast upon plaintiff to prove those boots either came back to defendants or were lost through the latter's negligence. Even if, it were alleged that defendants were Wailees for reward, this defence was quite sufficient.
Upon the advice of the British Consul, those in the "Creameries"—in the possession of which were British -and American goods—decided to turn the concern into a British organization, The first witness for defendants, Koraliff, produced copy of a resolution by the Council of Labour and Defence, showing that the property of' the various bodies was considered to have belonged to the State. The effect of subsequent orders was that by February a large quantity of goods were taken over by the Sisskesoyus, including the boots complained of, but witness could not state that the were actually removed from the godown.
The hearing was adjourned.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.