Leave to prepare a defence in the case, and an adjournment for a further hearing was granted by Judge P. Grant Jones in Hf. Supreme Court on Thursday in an action brought by Chu Tse-hong against 5. C. Sipgham, over a cheque for $4,547.17 which was alleged {o have been dishonoured. In evidence, defendant said that this cheque was never dishonoured, but he stopped payment on it because the plaintiff owed him money. He gave plaintiff the cheque because plointift was his compradore and according {0 the agreement between them defendant was to send in the accounts every three months.
The Judge; I do not sco why you pald the plaintiff this monoy?—TIt was in respect of money which ho ad-[vanced to me.
But why do you say that you have to pay him back for these advancos?—The plaintiff asked me for the cheque in order (o settle other accounts of his own.
The Judge: I think there is a conflict between the parties which needs to be investigated. Defendant has establish such facts as entitle him to a defence.
The case was adjourned for a special hearing.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.