Mr. Schuhl then called plaintff's attorney, Mr. Moss, as a witness for the defence. Having been, present at the meeting held on™ April 3, he was asked whether or not plaintiff then admitted the such payment. He cited instarfées' Further witnesses called by the in which oral evidence might be prosecution were Mr. Dolgoshem, admitted to vary the terms of a, residing at 27 Tracey Terrace, who contract. testified to the damage done by fire Judge Lobingier stated that' and water on January 2; Miss there was no ruling subject to so. Voronoff,-who said she would have many exceptions and variations as paid Dr. Szyszlo $500 to perform this matter of the introduction of an operation during January if he ora] evidence to vary a written, had not been incapacitated; and contract. The points to be consid- Mr. Ugretzoff, who verified the ered were; (1), Was there con- plaintiff's story. Dr. Bary, the tract of employment for the abso-: Russian specialist in nervous and lute payment of Tls. 600 monthly, mental diseases, who shares a suite and-(2) What sums of money were, of offices with the plaintiff, gave received by plaintiff and used by! evidence as to his high standing him. The interpretation of the in the profession, the loss occasion-contract was disputed and also the, ed by his illness and the sickness of amount of money chargeable to Plaintiff's wife and son. plaintiff. Under the circumstances,! For the defence, Mr. Schuh} first unless the opposing connec) called upon Mrs. Sullivan, a de-could agree upon a stipulation of Signer and saleswoman of many facts in this case, he would have to Years' experience, to estimate the have a transcript of the hearing Value of the dresses claimed to have submitted to him, together with 2 Chinese dealer in furs to estimate been ruined by the fire, and a salary of Tls. €00 was not to be' citation of authorities. paid unless profits permitted.
"Well," answered Mr. Moss, "I do not know whether I remember
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.