"This is another of those cases where both sides are simply lying and Lying." said the Assistant Judze, Mr. G. W. King, in IT, M. Supreme Court en Februney 18, in givimy' Judgiment for $70" and "costs in "favour of Bisham Singh, Sikh "watchman, who sued BL. Driver, a Parsee, for $280)
Jon two promissory notes, It was fallaged by the plaintiff that the defendant "had borrowed $80 from him early Inst year and later in the year had increased his debt ty -|borrowing another sum of $200.
The hole amount of $280 was at 2 per cent. interest.
The defendant denied recei any more than $70, reatiog that he had signed the first promissory note for $80 and promised to. pa: Sto interest. yer month, though *|aty received the smaller sum He fees thea out of employment, be]
and when the plaiatitt in court for the amount, had agreed the second note for $200 of court, He received no money for the second While His. Lords further into 3s, plainti er verbal exchanges in his belt, one of which had a round in the chamber. Both were fully loaded, but the other did not have 'a round ready for firing. The man confessed to being one of the sang of robbers who had rided the house.
The question which arusa at the trial was whether the accused had fired the shot while endeavouring: to evade arrest, in which ease was murder; or had the shot been fired accidentally: in the struggle, For the defence it was alleged that the accused had placed his hand in his gown in order to throw away his pistols, as he realized that, with so many" police about him, resistance was hopeless. The fact that the police seized both arms prevented him from drawing out the pistols and in the struggle the shot was fred,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.