Mr. Justice Bennet said that one of the difficulties the court and the parties were faced with was the absence of all of the original documents (seized by the Bolsheviks during the revolution) or authentic copies of them. Barings admitted that the plaintiffs did disburse £180,000 at the request of the Russian Ministry of 4 Agriculture in 1917. The point of difference between them upon which the whole case turned, was as to the wording of the two "talons" (orders for payment) issued to the plaintiffs. The question was whether the "talons" stated that the Ministry of Agriculture was to receive the sterling or whether they stated that the plaintiffs were to receive it. The telegrams dispatched to Barings instructing them to pay the two sums were the only relative do-cements extant, and there was no doubt about their terms. Barings did not pay because they never made any payments out of the "Compte Special" without the authority of the British Treasury—and that authority they never got. In both the telegrams sent to Barings the sender said that the payment was to be made to the order of the Ministry of Agriculture.
On the evidence it followed that unless for some unknown reason there owing and pointed out how terrible it would be if Wilde-Rice was made bankrupt. Eventually he suggested that if they would undertake to pay the money he would find Wilde-Rice a job in his office at £15 a week Several days later Wilde-Rice called at the offices in Manchester to inquire about the job, and Topalian said "he would get £15 a week if he would introduce wealthy mugs to him in whose names he could gamble."
Mr, Hemmerde pointed out that the commission on the transactions Topajian carried through for Wilde-Rice amounted to £632, In evidence Wilde-Rice said he was anxious to get out of the market and told Topalian so. He offered to pay the debt at the rate of £50 a quarter, but Topalian said his firm was not interested in instalments.
Mr, Pritchard: I suggest that on every occasion that anything was bought or sold it was done on your express instructions to either Topalian or his secretary?—No.
Were you ever told you could not lose by it—Yes.
Did you believe it?—Like a fool yes.
I suggest there is no truth in the suggestion Topalian asked you to find mugs?
Defendant: Yes, it is quite true. He used that word on the last occasion I went to Manchester to see him, about July.
The position is you are one of the mary! unfortunate people who have gambled and lost?—Yes, The Judge: You knew you were gamb'ing?—Ves.
You knew, I gather, from experience that gamblers must risk
would' have expert knowledge of the losing. Yes, but I thought that he markets.
Did: you think you were betting on a certainty?—No.
At jhe outset counsel had agreed that the whole case could be decided on tha evidence given on the counterclaim.
Without calling on Mr. Pritchard, the Judge said at the conclusion of the ease for Wild-Rice that he did not think the evidence supported the plea of negligence.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.