In reply to Mr, Brown defendant said plaintiff had never refused to pay, he had merely failed to pay, und' he quoted instances. The whole trouble in connection with the test had been the result of a regular plot on. the part of the hotel people, When the hotel ultimately paid their bill the merey would go to Dunn and defendants Viability. reduced accordingly. He had no idea whether defendant had paid himself salary at the rate of 200 2 month for two years; the had not than he was entitled to that amount, A clerk in the employ of defendant said that when Dunn was dismissed the accounts of the firm were all mixed up. He heard defendant and plaintiff agree regard~ ing the 32 per cent. commission for financing the contract. pleased was the plaintiff that he ave a big dinner party on the strength of it A representative of the firm of Lih Cheong stated that the Com-piny owed his firm more than Tis 6,000 between May and December last year for metal supplies, and in October they received a cheque for $4,000 signed by Dunn, That cheque (which whs produced in Court) was dishonoured. In the next two month, however, plaintiff paid Tis, 2,000, Tis, 1,000 and Tls. 1,000, but those amounts had noth ing to do with the cheque for $4,000, The hearing was adjourned,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.