In opening the case for the defence, Mr. Kentwell denied that plaintiff had ever been requested to draw up new plans. The only contract entered into was the first contract, under which defendant agreed to pay to plaintiff a commission of one per cent. when the foundations were complete, one per cent. when the walls were up, and one per cent. when the building had been completed.
Defendant then gave evidence, stating that when plaintiff took over the work from Mr. Zerle, he agreed to accept two per cent. on the original tender. He completed the plans and secured a tender for Tls. 34,000, which was accepted, and upon which Tls. 680 (2 per cent.) was paid to him. The work was stopped by order of the Chinese authorities and negotiations were entered upon to secure a permit. Later, witness wrote to tell plaintiff that alterations should he made without any charge to the company. In February, witness several times told plaintiff that the additional charges were unreasonable. The alterations made were carried out in spite of protests from_witness. It was when told the building was to be abandoned that plaintiff claimed three per cent. on the additional charges.
Witness agreed with Mr. Goldring that something was due to plaintiff—he did not know how much; it might be $50, or $100.
The reason for abandoning the building, said witness, was that his would-be partners failed. to come forward with the money.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.