"It is disgraceful, I will not permit this court to be used as: an engine to carry out money-lending transactions of this sort", said Judge W. King in H.3f. Supreme Court fon July 11, when the hearing of the action for $307 brought by Hazura Singh against Emil V. Hyndman was resumed. The plaintiff was represented: by Mr. N. A. Ivanov, and the defendant conducted' his "own The sum claimed was composed of $200, the balance of a promissory note made out by the defendant to Melia Singh, an Indian now in Mexico for whom the plaintiff? was acting; $60 on a promissory note signed by defendant in favour of the plaintiff; lawyer's fees and interest.
The defendant claimed that on the first. promissory note he had received $200 only, which he had paid back la instalments of $40, the receipts having been produced in court at the last hearing. On the second. promissory" note' he" had received $24 only, having first borrowed $14, signing for' §28, then borrowing a further $12, and signing for $60 on the two transactions. claimed that he had not received the whole $12 borrowed on the last occasion, the plaintiff having deducted for interest, The hearing was occupied by the exam ®t both plaintiff' and defendant by His Lordsh erose-examination by the defendant and Mtr. Ivanov. Mr. Ivanov. held that the defendant had received the fall amount of money as he had signed fo His Lordship then remarked that his court or no other court in the world would give judgment because a man was foolish enough to sign There was too much of this moneylending, he said, with the borrowers being afraid to. come into court. He asked for proof that the plaintiff. had paid to the witness the actual $400. Mr. Tvanov" here interposed that he had two witnesses. actually lent by Melia: Singh; he [would not consider the promissory note for $400, and thus the balance of $200 being claimed would not taken into account. Regarding the promissory note for.$60, the defendant said he had received $24 only, and the final promissory note for $295 which was-a sum of the others with interest and fees, he said was signed under pressure. He gave judgment for an approximate sum therefore, $80 in favour of the plaintiff, without costs.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.