Architect's Evidence: An Incident in the Office The General Hospital contract. case was continued at H. M. Supreme Court last Friday, before his Honour Judge Grain.
Mr. S. J. Halse (of Messrs. Moorhead.& Halse, the architects in charge of the work) stated that on one occasion he asked plaintiff how he expected to come out of the job and the answer was that he expected to make a profit of! about Tls. 40,000. There was no foundation for plaintiff's statement that he had been treated severely. His relations with witness were quite friendly, and as late as June, 1921, he asked witness to act as arbitrator for him in a dispute with another firm of architects. Some ill-feeling arose in July or August, when witness was unable to issue a certificate because the work was not finished. Plaintiff called at witness's office and after talking in an excited way became offensive, whereupon witness took him quietly by the shoulder and put him outside the office. It then became a question of "face," there being other contractors waiting in the vestibule, and plaintiff behaved in such a way that witness had to put him out of the office altogether. It was then that these proceedings were commenced. Extra work was paid for from time to time as completed. Witness denied that plaintiff had borne additional expenses in consequence of the building material.being changed. Some changes were allowed at his own request.
In__ cross-examination witness, specking as to delay in the arrival} of material, said it was suggested to plaintiff that this work should be cut out of the contract, but he did not want that done. He asked to be allowed to do the work as and when the goods arrived, saying that he would make no claim for damages owing to delay.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.