Stating that the preponderance of evidence lay on the side of the defendant, Judge Milton J. Helmick dismissed 'a claim brought against the American Securities Corporation by Mr. Morris Zimmerman in the US, Court for China on June 25. The case occupied the attention of the court all day the previous day, when 'Mr. Zimmerman, represented by Messrs. W. C. Watson and C. S. Franklin, asked for judgment in the amount of $90,000, which he said represented one per cent. commission which was promised him' if he secured a loan for $3,000,000 from the Chartered Bank of India, Aus tralia, and China, Defendants, represented by Mr. }3. B. Davies, denied ever making riy such agreement with the plain-tift, and, supported by a. deposition signed. by. Mr. R. W. Roberts, manager of the bank at ®e time of the alleged transaction, further denied ever having secured any such loan.
"he determination of this cause' said Judge Helmick "that day, delivering judgment, "rests on issues of "fact and not of law. After a careful consideration of the evidence, the Court is of the opinion that the Preponderance of evidence les on the side of the defendant, and accordingly judgment will be entered in favour of the defendant, and the complaint will be dismissed."
Plaintiff's Case On June 24, when the hearing opened, Mr. Watson said the piaintitt was approached by the defendants at the end of 1933, and was requested by them to arrange the loan, The defendants agreed to pay him the difference between the rate of 7 per ent, interest on the loan and the rate they actually would be charged by the bank, The plaintiff arranged the loan with the bank, and was informed that the bank's rate of interest would be 6 per cent, He was therefore claiming $90,000, A demand had been made for payment, which was refused, "The defence deny absolutely and in toto every single allegation the plaintiff makes in this case," replied Mr, Davies. "They never had any such arrangement, they never discussed any such arrangement, and the first they knew anything about it was when they received a letter from Mr, Zimmerman's lawyer."
"Not a Trustee" cee goa, ce, cee, some connection, he continued, was when plaintiff approached Father P. Cerezal, in October, 1933, and told him he had wealthy relatives who had a deposit in the Chartered Bank, and that he could secure loans for them on this money at a very low rate of interest -He stated further that Mr, R. W. Roberts, manager of the bank, was the trustee of this deposit. 'Defendants sent Father T. 'Alejandro and Mr. G, Pisarevsky to verify his statement, Mr. Roberts told them he knew nothing about it, and that he was not a trustee of any' such fund oF deposit. What actually happened was that later arrangements were made for the bank to lend the American Securities Corporation, under guarantee of the Augustinian Procuration, up to $500,000 against cargo in their godown. During 1934, defendants borrowed about $250,000, but this had nothing to do with Mr. Zimmerman, in evidence, so he arranged the ican in December, 1933, ond_was further promised 30 per cent, on any business he brought them subsequently. Later, the defendants refused to pay him. "f lost my patience one day and forced my way in to Father Cerezal. 1 sald:—"Why do you desire to cheat me? You are a holy father.' He sald:—'No, only God is holy.'
'The loan, witness continued, was to be used to advance against' merchandise which was placed in the defendant's godown. The reason defendants asked, him to approach the bank, instead of dealing direct, was that they were-afraid of losing face if the negotiations fell through. He said to them:—"Don't worry, 1 am sure we will not lose face, I will get the loan for you."
Cross-examined:—He denied having. approached he defendants regarding a loan on any money deposited in the bank by his relatives.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.