A dispute over a pair of trousers which turned out to be no dispute jat all was settled by Judge G: W. King in HM, Supreme gourt; on July 8, when he jeave "judgment in favour of the plaintiff, K. H, Thomas, a tailor, Zor. $4' and costs, against R. H.
Tu evidence {t was stated that the defendant ordered a jacker, shorts, and trousers from the plain: tt, The trousers, it was claimed, could not be worn by the defendant owing to their fit, and he refused to pay their cost, offering $44 instead of $54 demanded for the [whole "suit. After some corre" syondence the plaintiff agreed ina letter to accept this amount, His Lordship to the defendant: Why. didn't you send back ths trousers and pay the $44 and finish with it?
Defendant replied that the tailor' accountant always called at his: office and he had told him to call at his house and he.would give him ack the trousers. Lordship remarked that defendant could not try the trousers on la his. offic and defendant offered to try the on in court, "I'm not an expert in trousers," replied His Lordship, Since defendant was willing' pay $44 and the plaintiff was wil ing to accept that amount, His Lordship gave judgment accordingly with costs.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.