j Argunient. Over Gainishes. vim, hiving- entered into & bobthact The qyesiin, 58 to wither' with am. employee, owen the! employee any-money before the end of the month was the subject of argument in the U. S, Court for! China on February 10, before Judge M.D. Purdy.
The case involved was the one! in which garnishee proceedings had been filed against Capt. J. Anderson, master of the Yangtsze Rapids S. Co's str. Chi-ping, by Wong Pao-ding. Plaintiff had obtained judgment against defendant on October 11 last for $1,271, plus interest Dr. H. C. Mei, for plaintitt, yesterday made a motion for an order directing the Yangtsze Rapids Steamship. Ca, as garnishee to show cause way (1) It should not: be directed to make mote specific and definite its answers to the interrogatories propounded to it by plaintiff? relative to all credits due oF to become due to defendant, With special reference to other sums that may be earned by defendant or had been earned by him over and above his admitted monthly salary of $2,000 and with reference to his keep. anti sustenance on board ship while commanding the Chi-ping; (2) an in-Junction. should' not issue restraining it forthwith from. permitting defendant to overdraw his. monthly salary or any other moneys due to until the judgment shall have been satisfied; and (8) a judgment of, condemnation should not be entered against it for at least $700 of the $1,000 salary due to defend-fant for February and March, 1980.
In support of his motion, Dr. Agi pointed out that defendant. lived on board ship and his wife lived in chang. The latter's lenthly expenses approximated $800, It looked very much like eol-Tusion between the garnishee and defendant, because the former had stated that defendant had over-'Grawn his salary when they knew very well that a judgment had been entered against. him.
Mr, F, J. Schuhl, for defendant, mentioned that he did not think that an attachment should be levied against moneys which were not due. If money were not owing, an attachment could not be levied and salaries not had not been earned.
'Mr. W. S. Fleming, who appeared for the Yangtsze Rapids' S..8. Ca. said there was no merit in the motion. "The company, could not be enjoined: from paying parts salaries due to their employees. His clients were not interested in the present case and it did not. wish to assist. defendant' in do-feating the claim.
Dr. Mei. replied that the garnitheo had granted credit to Capt. Anderson well knowing that there was a judgment against him, and requested the Court to make. the order applied for.
Mr. Fleming demanded to know. under what authority the Court could make an order to this effect and asked for authorities. which provided for interference, Defendant was, as a matter of fact, indebted to. the company. It would be an extraordinary thing,—continued Mr. Fleming, if the motion were granted. He knew of no authorities which authorized, the enjoining of an employer from. paying salary to be earned by employees in the future and he said that the company had-no tract with the plaintiff and: was in. plaintiff's case against: defendant. If the company could. be enjoined from paying any portion of the salary to be earned in the future, it could be enjoined from paying. all of the salary,. with the result quit. that the employee: would probably
The Judge observed that, under the.contract, the company. would not be indebted to, defendant until the end: of the month, It was all very well to say in the middle of the: month that. defendant was) indebted to the company but. the! company. did not hand' him over hhis salary until the end.of the month, They would' not be: indebted to him until then, If they wore not trying' to. defeat. the claim, why did they allow. Capt. Anderson credit? It was. whipping the devil around. the, bush: to. contend. that! defendant was honestly. trying. to sbiaply: stp, the- Goart'a ores, 'Ins. Fleming said' that' the usual practice of captains of! ce the company to overdraw before the end of the month.
The Judge: Ihave heard alor about this captain business, When this same question came up before in another ease in which you were in, it was otherwise, Mz. Fleming: The eirumstances differed, (Laughter.)
The Judge: And that was ther the captains opposed the company. Tt amounts now to. conspiracy, between the company and Capt Anderson to defeat a just claim.
Mr. Fleming: That is a great me justice to the company.
The Judge: This man, the plain~ tif, ought to be paid his money. He has every right to it, Defendant gets $1,000 a month and his fees fand the Court held that. plaintiff was justified in getting what de-fondant owed. I consider it. an outrage that defendant does not pay. Tam going to give this Chinese the fallest opportunity of getting his money and Iam going to do all in power to seo what can be done to force payment, I will issue the order applied for, that the company should show cause why an me Junction should not be issued. I want to seo to it that the contract' is observed and: that: the company does.not aid the defendant in flouting the judgment. Unless. Mr. Hoyt (president, of the company) gives a written assurance that hi will not advance any money. unde the contract, until it is due I: must, {issue the order to find out why.
Mr. Fleming pointed out in com: clusion that "he wanted to make clear that there was no collusion between the company and the defendant and the company did not want to assist defendant in. de+ {eating the claims of his creditors, 'They were willing, if counsel for plaintiff and "defendant could agree, to withhold a portion of defendant' salary to be paid to the plaintiftr each "month.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.