Harris, witness said that it was only fon February 12 that he knew Jdebt by the firm had been placed to his personal account.
'000.
It was for Thr 40,000?—Tls. 38,
And that was a loss incurred by you on the New York Stock ex-[change?—Correct.
Your personal loss?—No.
The auditors in New York debited ft to your private account?—As re-[quested by me.
That was because it was your own private affair?—Not at all. did regard it as such until I got to Shanghai. Mr. David then voluunteered to divide the loss among the partners because, said he, you had come back with a fac should have asked When he said was quite: agreeable to the partners sharing the loss, I took it for granted that, as defendant was la charge of the books, the correct Procedure would be followed.
Then why should he be angry when you object to its being made your personal debt?—Probably befeause he had forgotten what he had said formerly.
When you went to New York, ]you -were told not to speculate in fcotton?—That was agreed upon.
T suggest that it was after you had looked into the books that you Siggested voluntary liquidation?— melons." Witness had been in the habit of having one or two cases of melons shipped for himself during the season, and he undertook get -two eases' for Mr. David, When these arrived, he quite for-/got for whom he had ordered them and disposed of the melons to other people whereupon, when he heard of the matter, "Mr. David: became furious: and doctored that jhe would quit the' firm: "AMI right," said Mrz Rosenfeld, senior, "you-can quit you want for We will arrau In answer to: further questions, witness said that the "debt to Messrs. J. Spunt. & Ca. was or-mally "Tls. 100,000, -which sum /Br. Rosenfeld senior agreed to pay for: release' from an agreement under which'he was not to engage in: the cotton "business. in' Shanghai and was not to-use his own name.
The debt was not a: trading debt. This agreement: was made "when this father retired from that partnership. Itwas agreed -that "no <Veverything." "Upon: this, defendant money: should be-paid if Mr. Ai B. oven: if-the business had made' a Rosenfeld ceased to carry on the business, or if he ceased to. be.a partner and his name dropped from the firm.
Tu answer to Mr. Wing, witness said the firm had now been incorporated as A. B. Rosenfeld and his father took an active part in the business, so that the agreement with Messrs. Spunt remained in force.
The Melons Quarrel.
Mr. A. B. Rosenfeld, senior part-riner, gave evidence that at one time was in. partnership with Messrs. J. Spunt & Ca. and on leaving them he entered into a restrictive agreement, as described, He retired in 1916, but six months later changed his mind and returned to China. The sole reason for taking Mr. David into partnership was because Mr. Julius was to open a branch office in New York. Asked if his mame was of commercial value, witness said he would say that it was. It was known over the world and particularly in the United States and China, The quarrel bout the melons, witness continued, ended by Mr. Davi saying: ' "Pop, let's forget it When the second dispute occurred about the New York account, witness never consented to defendant Jeaving the firm, Mr. "Harris—Why have you me corporated without his consent, he is still a partner?—We had do something, for reasons best known to ourselves, Witness went. on to say th against his instructions, his son speculated in New York and lost Tis, $8,000, Mr. David and himself were upset about it, but it was agreed the loss should be debited to the firm.
Mr. A.B. Foox, in charge of, plaintiffs! Tientsin office, said there was a considerable amount due to the firm there, four Chinese tween them owing from Tls. 150, 000 to Tls. 200,000, After repeated efforts to collect, all he could get Was a promissory note for Tis, 2,600, and there was no chance of collecting the balance. If they waited "long enough, they would probably get this Tis, 2500, but that was the only ray of hope in Tientsin, Not cent came in while he was in charge of the Tientsin office, 'Tientsin Exporters' Heavy Losses.
In reply to Mr. Harris, witn explained that owing to the Japa and the shortage of Tientsin cotton 28 to Ths, 42, and when the market was up to Tis, 33 the Japanese somehow ved Chinese who had entered Endeavours to pre-were made through the of Commerce, the various Consuls and the Diplomatic Body, but without success, and practically 90 per cent. of exporters were involved in heavy loss, His Lordship—The crash is quite well known, and Ido not. think suggested that Messrs. Rosenfeld unduly speculated cotton futures and got hit, Mr, Harris—It is not suggeste Mrs. R. David, plaintiffs' secret ary, described the scene in the office on the afternoon of February 12, "Defendant demanded his mor Mr. Julius Rosenfeld dictate note of agreement of voluntary liquidation, This defendant refused to sign, Mr. J. A. Turner (of Messrs, Seth, Mancell & McLure), gave evidence that the loss on the Spunt contracts stood at Tls. 64,484 on March 24, and on those of Messrs. Hutton & Ca. at Tis: 13,960. On February 18, the balance due to Messrs. Spunt & Ca. under Mr. Rosenfeld, senior's,' agreement, stood at Tis, 46,943, 'From Janvary 1 to February' 19, the profit and loss account showed a total loss of Tis, 41,282, This Toneluded plaintiffs case, Defentlant's Agreement.
For: the lefenee, Mr.. Reader Harris, on the question as to whether there had been a breach: of the agreement (which he described ambiguous' and incomplete document) emphasized its provision that the partnership could: be terminated by mutual consent, Defendant put capital into the business at a time when plaintiffs required it, and.he retained the privilege of slying: I have Sinished. with the -firm and.shall retire. Give me back my capital and all is over between us." Tt was—agreed that: the value of*his share: should be \Tls. 25,000,: "and
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.